UK - Ashley Dale, 28 fatally shot at home, Liverpool - 21 Aug 2022

[Legally Bland]

12:40JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

'If alibi might be true, Peers is not guilty'​

Mr Wright: “Fourth and final topic. What of the events on August 20 and 21 and the evidence of alibi. Let me grasp the nettle of the alibi now. There is a real risk of the burden of proof that exists between prosecution and defence being inverted. There is a natural scepticism in calling such evidence, particularly when the people involved in calling it have such an obvious and personal connection to the accused. The obligation is not to prove that he was at home at the time of the shooting. The obligation remains on the prosecution to prove that he was not and at the time of the shooting he was in Leinster Road encouraging James Witham in his mission.
“In calling evidence of alibi it is inevitable that will be subjected to scrutiny. Conversely, any consistency being magnified by them has evidence of obvious rehearsal. The short point is, whether consistent or not in every material part, it's either undermined because it's inconsistent or it's consistent and they have put their heads together. You can’t win. We invite you to guard against any scepticism.
“Equally, if your alibi is that you were at home the overwhelming likelihood is it will involve confirmation from members of your family, the people we naturally spend most of your time with. You saw them, the parents, and you can assess them. Making obvious concessions, we invite you so to do in respect of any civilian witness for nervousness or combativeness arising from such pressures in such circumstances. Were they each unabashed liars, or maybe they were concerned and anxious parents doing their level best in difficult circumstances to give an imperfect but honest account of their recollection of the late evening and early hours of the 20th and 21st of August. Just for a moment, put yourself in the shoes of them or a witness in the witness box concerned with allegations such as these. Even when you come to tell the truth, you find you are stumbling over your words or nervous or even petrified. Even if all you’re coming to do is to try to give a straightforward account of events so long ago, but now of momentous importance to a family member.
“Only if you are sure they are each unabashed liars rather than concerned anxious parents doing their level best in difficult circumstances to give an imperfect but honest account, only then can you disregard their evidence and the evidence of alibi in this case.
“If what they say is or may be true, we invite you to conclude irrespective of any other element of this case or any other unfavourable conclusion or of Joseph Peers’s connection to it, the case in respect of count one, two and three falls.
“As to the seemingly powerful point raised by Mr Greaney in his closing address in respect of the CCTV. That is a perfect answer, in a perfect world standing where he is rather than they are and where the defendant is. You will recall the evidence of the dad, Thomas Peers. “When asked about this he said he thought the CCTV had a 14-day override. If that was something that was a calculated lie by accomplished and unabashed liars, you may have thought he would have been falling over that to tell you that right at the outset. It only came out in cross examination when asked about cctv. That is his response. That may be an indication here where the truth lies in this case.
“Doing the maths, 14 days from the night of August 20 takes us to the night of September 3. In other words, two days before the police attended the family home of Joseph Peers in respect of a search in which no indication was given as to who or why or what the police were looking for.
“If the asserted failure to retain the CCTV is an event of significance undermining the reliability of alibi, you may care to reflect on the sheer possibility of retaining material of his innocence may be of significance and would then be lessened unless retained for all time.
“It seems the criticism is in not having the foresight of before September 3 of retaining the material that for some unexplained reason, it may be in the future be of critical importance to Joseph Peers.
“While the case against Joseph Peers rests on satisfying you so that you’re sure that his alibi is a false one, the case on behalf of Joseph Peers is not reliant on proving the truth of the alibi. The exercise you must undertake is not so alibi true is not guilty, alibi false is not guilty. If the alibi is or might be true, the verdict is not guilty. If, however, you are sure the alibi is a lie, you may take that into account but you cannot convict solely or mainly on that basis. Sometimes an innocent person who fears the truth will not be believed, then may instead invent an alibi. Sometimes where they may believe that an alibi will help their case because the truth may not be sufficient, they may invent that. If you’re sure Joseph Peers was not at home, you must be sure he was where the prosecution say he was encouraging the offences alleged against him. If you believe or suspect the alibi may be true, that’s the end of the case.”

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Legally Bland]

12:48JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

'There really is only one verdict'​

Mr Wright: “If you reject the alibi, let’s consider some of the evidence the prosecution continue to rely on. The purchase of the Sim or top up at 17.51 for Niall Barry. If this was done by Joseph Peers for the malign reason suggested by the prosecution, why did he not purchase one for himself? If he knew what was going down. Why does he continue to use his number? If the inactivity of Joseph Peers’s phone is so sinister why does he switch it back on at 23.09 before any shooting has taken place? If it is to provide an update, why is it not him contacting Zeisz but Zeisz contacting him? Joseph Peers would need a crystal ball to foresee Sean Zeisz was about to call him.
“Now, the movements of the Hyundai in the vicinity of Leinster Road. It was a bit of a moving feast that. It became within a stone’s throw, then back to the vicinity. You can see whether it is in the vicinity of Leinster Road when one gets to Glen Road and the surrounding area. If this was Joseph Peers casing the area, why did the vehicle not go along Monterrey Road, along Oak Hill Road or along Leinster Road? Why after returning out of Glen Road did the Hyundai not turn right? Why did it go in the opposite direction, away from the vicinity of Leinster Road. because, contrary to the prosecution revised theory that Joseph Peers was in the vehicle alone which emerged in the third week of this trial after Mr Tarpey’s evidence had been induced, this was not a recce or anything to do with the later events. It was as prosaic as a wrong turning on the way from David McCaig’s house to collect cannabis.
“At 23.07, the ANPR captures the Hyundai travelling eastbound away from Liverpool towards Roby and Joseph Peers’s home. Why if the Hyundai was then being utilised in a planned shooting is it still bearing its true registration plate. Why if this was not to drop Joseph Peers off would it be in the vicinity of his home, going east away from the intended target’s home.
“In the prosecution’s most recent theory, the firearm had already been collected, to explain the apparent anomaly in the cell siting of James Witham’s home. Why was this trip with the firearm in the car away rather than towards Old Swan? There’s a very simple answer. Because Joseph Peers was being dropped off. This has nothing to do with the shooting and everything to do with his case that he was at home when there was no need to secure CCTV confirming his movements. At the time of the shooting he was not at Leinster Road in company with James Witham, but at home. If that is or may be correct, there really is only one verdict in this case in respect of Joseph Peers. That is, not guilty. Thank you.”
Mr Wright concludes his speech.

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Legally Bland]

12:50JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

Short break​

Justice Goose asks Mr Swift how long his speech on behalf of Kallum Radford will take, and he indicates around 45 minutes.
The judge asks Mr Swift to leave the courtroom briefly so that it can be decided whether or not this will take place now.

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Legally Bland]

13:03JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

'Why include Kallum Radford in the loop?'​

The jury are brought back in and indicate they are comfortable to continue.
Steven Swift rises to deliver his closing speech on behalf of Kallum Radford.
SS: “Members of the jury, it’s been quiet at this end of the bench. Now is my opportunity to address you.
“I don’t know if any of you have served on a jury before or if this is the first time you have been in a courtroom. The fact remains that when you walk into a courtroom you don’t know what it is that you’re about to be asked to deal with. I dare say you weren’t thinking you were going to walk into something like this.no doubt you would have been taken aback immediately when you saw the number of people and got a sense of what was to come.
“Perhaps nothing prepared you for what was to follow. A killing. Machine guns. Violence. Gang membership or associations. Knives being discovered and threats. It’s an alien world isn’t it, that you’ve all walked into. You’ve sat, listened and heard the evidence unfold. At the outset, things happen quite quickly. You could be forgiven for developing a prejudice, an immediate response to what you’re being told by the Crown against the backdrop of this courtroom. The importance is focussing on the evidence. It’s the evidence so far as we are concerned that touches upon Kallum Radford.
“You have been given directions to judge the evidence on each defendant individually. Look at the counts individually, look at the defendants individually. That’s all Kallum Radford can ask through me. You may think we are a long way from what was being said by the Crown as against Kallum Radford. at the outset, the Crown were saying he knew he was making arrangements for the storage of a vehicle that had been used in a serious crime.
“How was he making those arrangements? When did he make those arrangements? What evidence is there now at the end of the trial? The Crown said we invite you to ask, why take steps to put the Hyundai out of the way. Consider that. That’s got nothing to do with Kallum Radford. you may think, he was being used.
“The Crown said they didn’t want the police to find it. The police did find it. It was immediately noticed. They may not have wanted the police to find it, but how does that impact on the actions of Kallum Radford in the case? What has he done? What was his knowledge? Why would they want to include Kallum Radford in the loop? It’s beyond that, it’s including Kallum Radford and Curits Hopwood, the cousin whose house it was when the car was first put on the drive, and Abbie Jevins. Why would they want to do that? Expand the loop of knowledge of the car being put on the drive?”
“Is that the case? Doing so with the intent of impeding the arrest and prosecution of Mr Peers or Mr Zeisz?"

13:09KEY EVENT

'He'd been thrown under a bus, he'd been used'​

Mr Swift sats reports in ECHO “Made no reference to any person or vehicle in which the police were interested.”
SS: “How would he know? The prosecution can’t just say, Kallum Radford must have know that this car was involved and he must have intended to impede the arrest of Mr Peers or Mr Zeisz. They can just do that, but not within a criminal trial. It simply isn’t enough is it? it’s not a case of speculating or guessing to reach unsupported conclusions in a criminal case. It’s a matter for you to decide. You may think Kallum Radford stands in contrast to other defendants in this case. He stands alone on count four in this indictment. He stands out nor just because of the lack of evidence against him, but you’re dealing with a man here, you may think, without gang allegiances. Without involvement in fallouts, in threats with weapons. Without any motive to assist others who may have been involved. With no associations with other defendants other than what he volunteered in his interviews, when he said I know Joseph Peers.
“That’s the man you’re dealing with. There’s one comment that came out when the interviews were being played, when Kallum Radford said he thought he’d been thrown under a bus. He said been thrown under a bus and then driven over. I don’t make light of this. He’d been thrown under a bus, and he’d been used.
“All Kallum Radford can ask of you through me is that you be true to the oath, to judge the case on the evidence. Keep at the forefront of your mind the burden and standard of proof. The prosecution need to make you sure of guilt.”

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Legally Bland]

13:18JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

'Who is Kallum Radford?'​

Mr Swift: “Who is Kallum Radford? It’s difficult to try to lift the lid on the lives of individuals presented before you. At the very least, you had the opportunity to watch the video of the police interviews. What came out of that was that he was living between his cousin’s house, father, a baby was expected. The death of his father was referred to just a matter of days before that first interview. Some learning difficulties and concerns have been expressed. His childhood friendship with Abbie Jevens. his friendship with Joseph Peer’s brother and contact with his mother.
“That’s what we had by way of background to Kallum Radford. Let me pose this question? Why is Kallum Radford sitting in that dock in the corner? What brings him to this courtroom?
“The police were called to Abbie Jeven’s house on an entirely different matter. Officers immediately saw the car parked on the drive. The police identified that vehicle and from there the investigation developed. The car had been put onto Abbie Jeven’s drive it seems within perhaps a day or so of the initially being put on the drive of the defendant’s cousin. You heard the evidence from PC Ward in relation to going round, speaking to Abbie Jevens seeing the vehicle, not hidden, not covered up. Couldn’t those gates have been open and it put in the back garden if you were trying to hide the car? Isn’t that road on the bus route? The actions of a young man with the knowledge of the sig of this vehicle? Putting it on the driveway of his friends house?
“We have the messages from Abbie Jevens to Kallum Radford. I’m getting arrested, i’ve got nothing to do with his car. The response of Kallum Radford is ‘oh my god. What the *advertiser censored**, don’t *advertiser censored***** lie, oh my god’. You may think that’s an immediate shocked reaction of Kallum Radford. the police are there with Abbie with the car. Kallum Radford becomes aware of the link. What does he do? What does Kallum Radford do? A day or so later he walked into a police station voluntarily and sits down following arrest. He’s presented himself for hours and hours of questions being posed by officers. You can compare that action, Kallum Radford walking into a police station.
“What is the plan? What do the Crown say the plan is in relation to Kallum Radford and his involvement? He’s assisting the others in the knowledge of what’s happened. Does it come to this when you look at the evidence? This car has been dumped on Kallum Radford. You may think even when he is not there, it’s taken to that address when he’s not there. It’s moved. Why? Because he couldn’t get his bike out of the back of that house. So the car was moved. It doesn’t sound like much of a plan does it, on Kallum Radford’s part? My friend’s going on holiday, let's ask Abbie if she can have it on her drive. It’s then moved to her drive. Involving Abbie in this as well as his cousin. It doesn’t appear to be much of a plan.
“It doesn’t appear to be planned in the sense this vehicle is driven in broad daylight after use in the killing across from Liverpool to St Helens. Why not immediately after? Why not earlier? If this is some plan Kallum Radford is aware of, why the need for a taxi back from that arrest?
“What evidence is there Kallum Radford was aware of the use of the car? I’d suggest none. Or the involvement of Mr Peers or Mr Zeisz. None.”

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Legally Bland]

13:34JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

Radford 'explained his fears'​

Mr Swift says Radford did not make the call to book a taxi for Joseph Peers after the Hyundai was dropped off in Redgate Avenue.
SS: “So far as Kallum Radford is concerned, what we had during the course of Mr Peers’s evidence was the car being left there, the car being damaged in a crash, £100 being provided which was split. I had £50, Abbie had £50. In cross examination on behalf of Kallum Radford, not pre-arranged. Only his cousin is in. He books the taxi. Kallum Radford not present. Kallum Radford didn’t know it would be dumped there. The car was moved in a day or so.
“The Crown, cross examining Mr Peers, elicited a telling answer when it was suggested it was deliberately passed onto Kallum. ‘I wouldn’t have put him in that position, I wouldn’t have done that to Kallum Radford. I wouldn’t have put normal people like Kallum in this position’.
“Is there significance in the vehicle being moved? It’s not clear what the Crown are saying. If Kallum Radford moved it or when it was moved. It comes to this. There is a text message from Abbie’s dad, effectively who’s put that car on your drive? We know that’s on the 25th. By the 25th, within a couple of days, that car is there.
“Kallum Radford in his interviews said he thought it was moved in a day or so. It was the evidence from Mr Peers’s father on a completely unrelated matter. He was accepting he’d collected them, Mr Peers and Mr Witham. What he said was this: ‘O the mMonday, I went to work. I had a call, I think I met him at Raddy’s’. You may think Mr Radford. ‘I dropped Joe off and I picked him up. I think I picked him up at Raddy’s and Joe’s mate, and i took him to the hotel’. Thomas Peers was trying to think of his movements.
“The only evidence of Kallum Radford being in that car comes from two sources. He is asked by the officers and says ‘yes i’ve been in that car, the front passenger seat. I was in it when it was moved from my cousin’s drive to Abbie’s drive’. Then DNA on the passengers side of that vehicle.
Mr Swift refers to Radford not giving evidence. He says the judge will give a specific direction about that.
“May I take you through aspects of the defendant’s interviews. The interview, the first interview, let’s set the scene. You have camera crews or a TV crew there. It follows the death of Kallum Radford’s father. There’s question after question after question. Over the course of the interviews, there’s approximately three and a quarter hours of questioning put to Kallum.
“We know Kallum Radford’s father had died in distressing circumstances. Learning disabilities, depression. Did you think this was a frightened young man who didn’t know where to turn, didn’t know what to say? What he was saying you may think is ridiculous and nonsensical. I met two lads who I didn't know randomly on the street and they said can you look after my car. That’s what Kallum Radford was saying from the off. Why was he saying that at that stage? He did go on to make reference to Mr Peers, to make reference to hearing the name Z or Zest as someone he’d known as an associate. Volunteered those names, volunteered his friendship with Abbie, telling the police about Abbie going on holiday. He denies knowledge of anyone else.
“It concluded with the officers raising this issue. They’re asking whether he was in fear he might get hurt and if he’d been threatened. He’s then interviewed some time later, determined to tell the truth. You saw him saying to the officer he was frightened and scared for his family and continued to be. He wanted to tell them precisely what happened. You may think a realisation of the enormity of the situation he found himself in. He was giving fine details about what happened. The car being dumped without his knowledge, the big, volunteering the money.
“Kallum Radford is explaining his fear. His fears of saying anything in that first interview, because the cameras were there and his concern people would know he was at the police station and he was talking. He raises issues about concerns for his friends and family. He raises concerns in relation to Mr Peers. ‘I thought he was my friend. He’s just a rat. I didn’t think he’d be capable of anything like this.”

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Legally Bland]

13:39JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

Case against Kallum Radford 'far from being proved'​

Mr Swift: “Ultimately, you may think when you reflect on those interviews, that what Kallum Radford was saying throughout, even in those first two interviews, was an explanation how he had come by the car. And his explanation of that changing account in difficult circumstances and a determination to tell the police about what was happening against the background of everything you now know about this case. What more could Kallum Radford actually say here? He spoke to the police for many hours.
“We would respectfully submit to you, members of the jury, when you reflect at the end of the case you are in a very different position from those opening remarks. I would suggest to you you are far far from being able to say I’m sure. Far, far from being able to leave this courtroom, walk across Derby Square, walk away from this case, confident the crown have satisfied you of the case against Kallum Radford. we urge you as strongly as possibly as we can to the conclusion that when you come to consider his case, you are far from being sure and to find him Not guilty.”
Mr Swift thanks the jury and concludes his speech. That will be all the jury will hear this week, and they are asked to return on Monday morning at 10.30. Thanks for following our coverage, we will return with further live updates next week.

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[bobbymkii]

13:39JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

Case against Kallum Radford 'far from being proved'​

Mr Swift: “Ultimately, you may think when you reflect on those interviews, that what Kallum Radford was saying throughout, even in those first two interviews, was an explanation how he had come by the car. And his explanation of that changing account in difficult circumstances and a determination to tell the police about what was happening against the background of everything you now know about this case. What more could Kallum Radford actually say here? He spoke to the police for many hours.
“We would respectfully submit to you, members of the jury, when you reflect at the end of the case you are in a very different position from those opening remarks. I would suggest to you you are far far from being able to say I’m sure. Far, far from being able to leave this courtroom, walk across Derby Square, walk away from this case, confident the crown have satisfied you of the case against Kallum Radford. we urge you as strongly as possibly as we can to the conclusion that when you come to consider his case, you are far from being sure and to find him Not guilty.”
Mr Swift thanks the jury and concludes his speech. That will be all the jury will hear this week, and they are asked to return on Monday morning at 10.30. Thanks for following our coverage, we will return with further live updates next week.

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

The reason they're adjourning this early is because two of the barristers are involved in the Natalie Bennett sentencing this afternoon:

Natalie Bennett to be sentenced for murder of boyfriend today

The 47-year-old mum stabbed 24-year-old Kasey Anderson in the heart

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Alyce]

The reason they're adjourning this early is because two of the barristers are involved in the Natalie Bennett sentencing this afternoon:

Natalie Bennett to be sentenced for murder of boyfriend today

The 47-year-old mum stabbed 24-year-old Kasey Anderson in the heart

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

Thanks Bobby.

Slightly off topic, but I'm astonished she only got 18 years.

 

[bobbymkii]

Thanks Bobby.

Slightly off topic, but I'm astonished she only got 18 years.

Not saying it's right or wrong but those domestic knife-murder cases usually have a starting point of 15 years, so it seems about normal.

In this one below however, the minimum term was 9 years. NINE! For stabbing her husband to death in their home!

Teresa Hanson jailed for minimum of 9 years after murdering husband

Hanson has been given a life sentence with a minimum term of nine years after stabbing her husband days after Christmas

www.hulldailymail.co.uk

 

[scapa]

Solid work by the barristers in this case.

Obviously much more to come, but were I on the jury I'd likely have JW, NB, SZ guilty for sure, JP and IF as maybes, and don't think I'd be minded to throw KR under it at this point. Didn't find his defence absolutely compelling but his prosecution always seemed like a bit of a capper / reach, and consequently almost an afterthought.

Expecting to see LH back in the news at some point, given his criminal history and the clear anger at him amongst the main players here and the likelihood of these "major beefs" rolling on. Poor Ashley.

 

[Legal]

Solid work by the barristers in this case.

Obviously much more to come, but were I on the jury I'd likely have JW, NB, SZ guilty for sure, JP and IF as maybes, and don't think I'd be minded to throw KR under it at this point. Didn't find his defence absolutely compelling but his prosecution always seemed like a bit of a capper / reach, and consequently almost an afterthought.

Expecting to see LH back in the news at some point, given his criminal history and the clear anger at him amongst the main players here and the likelihood of these "major beefs" rolling on. Poor Ashley.

Yes, totally agree. And for me the fact that JW, NB, SZ, JP and IF were all in the flat together, JW and JP left together, and then returned together and in the interim all 5 were constantly messaging each other, makes it extremely hard to believe JW just went off on his own and decided to shoot someone!

Add to that, JW's blatant lies, and insistence the others weren't involved, which means clearly they were, plus all the contradictions and escapes from Liverpool in the aftermath....very incriminating.

Not sure about KR and I feel he's such a minor character in this, but as the prosecution said, he continued hiding the car after it came out SZ had been arrested.

Yep, really hope LH gets his comeuppance. What a piece of work. Like you say, such a shame Ashley was the one who paid the price.

 

[chimpface]

Some interesting links...

Police hunting 18-year-old man in connection with drugs supply

POLICE are searching for an 18-year-old man wanted in connection with an on-going investigation into drugs supply.

www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk

Men police want to track down in hunt for EncroChat suspects

Six men from the Huyton area are currently the subject of public appeals released by Merseyside Police

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

Sean Zeisz charged with conspiring to get guns and cause GBH

The 27-year-old was accused of conspiring to attack Jamie Nee

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Alyce]

10:25KEY EVENT

Good morning​

We're back in Liverpool Crown Court for day 26 and week seven of the trial of six men in connection with the death of Ashley Dale.
Today we are due to hear closing speeches on behalf of Sean Zeisz, Niall Barry, Ian Fitzgibbon and James Witham, time permitting.

Last week Paul Greaney, KC, delivered the closing speech for the prosecution
before speeches were also delivered by Peter Wright, KC, for Joseph Peers and Steven Swift, for Kallum Radford.

Crown Court reporter Adam Everett and Crime Reporter Jonathan Humphries are back in courtroom 5:1 and will be providing live updates as proceedings continue.

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Alyce]

Four in one day seems quite ambitious

 

[Legally Bland]

10:45JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

Judge enters court​

Mr Justice Goose is on the bench and calls for the jury.
Adam Davis, KC, representing Sean Zeisz, rises to begin his closing speech to the jury.

10:50JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

'Evidence is king'​

Mr Davis: “It’s inevitable that you will find the circumstances in which Ashley Dale tragic and deeply sad. It is a tragedy for her family and loved ones. Please understand nothing we say is intended to belittle that. When Sean Zeisz said he was heartbroken, you may take that as genuine. Even if the prosecution are right, those at 267 Pilch Lane could not have intended Ashley to be the victim of this.
“However, you must put to one side those feelings. They must not be allowed to rule your head. Perhaps the best example of that, is that Sean Zeisz accepts carrying out illegal activities, namely being involved in the supply of cocaine. You may think anyone involved in that trade is no saint. However, regardless of your views about this, they must play no part in your decision making. Sympathy, anger, dislike, none of these have any place here."
Mr Davis reminds the jury of the oath they took at the beginning of the case, specifically that they must “try the case on the evidence you have heard”.
He says they: “Must bring a logical approach and try the case on the evidence, not speculation.”
AD: “The Crown have started many weeks ago with a clear case theory. He was hit by Dusty, and that is what has led to this killing. We’ve seen this case theory develop and adapt. Now Sean Zeisz is possibly involved in North Wales and the Kyle Line. we suggest to you, on a dispassionate appraisal of the evidence, the crown’s case does not survive. Evidence is king. Whatever the crown’s case theory says is all well and good. You can only look at the evidence and decide the case on the evidence.”

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[bobbymkii]

Four in one day seems quite ambitious

Especially when one of those due to speak is Prof. John Cooper KC.

When he defended Cashman his closing seemed to take forever!

 

[Legally Bland]

11:01JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

Evidence 'explodes prosecution case theory'​

Mr Davis: “Given how the prosecution have nailed their colours to the mast, the motive is largely based on Ashley’s messaging. They have only mentioned a few out of context messages. We have to remind you of the evidence that does not support the Crown’s theory.
“There will be three sections to this speech. The background, what you now know about Sean Zeisz. the night of the shooting, and thirdly the day and days afterwards. I’m actually going to deal with the last part first. It is very informative as to the dangers of putting case theory above evidence.
“Let’s talk about August 21 and the following days. The prosecution say because he’s doing drug deals, he’s not heartbroken or upset. That is simply not right. How does anyone react to bereavement or shock? We are all different. Sometimes sticking to routine is the best way to get through.
“Then he goes to his mum’s to Sunday lunch with Barry and Fitzgibbon in the car. Implausible say the crown. Why? It is for the Crown to disprove. Where would you want to be if you received some sad or shocking news? In the family home, eating a cooked meal, being fussed over by your mum? The only reason the prosecution say it is implausible is because they set off down a dead end path due to a comment in Kallum Radford’s first interview. There is nothing that would lead them to suggest Sean Zeisz had anything to do with the Hyundai at all. The Crown have formed their case theory and cast it in concrete. They had even named him on the indictment in Mr Radford’s case based on that one comment. That cannot be evidence against Sean Zeisz.He wasn’t there to say that’s not right, I wasn’t there. The comment Mr Radford completely resiled from in his third interview.
“Sean Zeisz was involved. We’re not sure how. As a passenger?. In a Mercedes in convoy. They formed that case theory cast in concrete because they need to, Ladies and Gentlemen. They need to pin some criminality on Sean Zeisz. there was nothing else. What was his role in this?
“They forgot to mention that in Mr Radford’s third and final interview, he says a taller and skinnier man than him. You’ve seen him. It was not Z or Zest. Joseph Peers had been away on holiday with Z or Zest.
“No, the Crown say you can be sure it was because Sunday lunch was implausible. Really? Because his phone was off, Ladies and Gentlemen.
“Every single day, Sean Zeisz’s phone is inactive for over one and a half hours. Not just overnight. Over the course of every single day. The period of the drop off to St Helens is only 20 or 30 minutes. This is just barrel scraping. They point to Peers and Fitzgibbon phones also being active. Guilt by association. Guilty by false logic. He is also with NIall Barry. There’s no mention of his phone being inactive.”
“Is there DNA in the Hyundai? No. Are there fingerprints? No. Sean Zeisz himself told you he’d never even been in that Hyundai. The Hyundai triggered multiple ANPR cameras on its trip to St Helens. we have put the Hyundai further away from Sean Zeisz and his mum’s house. We have a photo of Sean Zeisz, Ian Fitzgibbon and Niall Barry in the Mercedes, not on route to St Helens but en route to [his mum’s] in Roby.
“The cells used on that day are consistent with some use by Sean Zeisz being en route to and possibly in Roby. We have Sean Zeisz’s mother, a nervous but honest witness. The prosecution did not accuse her of lying, but tried to probe how she could remember that Sunday. It was because of the imminent wedding trip to Ibiza. It’s hardly surprising she remembers the last Sunday before that trip.
“The family’s other house in Longreach was searched that Saturday, the 27th. Sean Zeisz handed himself in the following Tuesday, the 30th. For the Hyundai to have anything to do with Sean Zeisz, you would have to ignore Kallum Radford’s third and final interview, you have to ignore the absence of any ANPR of the Mercedes going to Sean Zeisz and you would have to conclude Angela Jones was lying about Sunday lunch. She also confirmed what Sean Zeisz told you, she would not have his friends in the house. Hardly surprising given what we know about Sean Zeisz and his friends and what they get up to.
“The Hyundai case theory is shown to be exactly that. Case theory without any evidence. The evidence explodes that case theory, it completely destroys it.”

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Legally Bland]

11:20KEY EVENT

Olivia McDowell 'unreliable narrator who thrives on drama'​

Mr Davis: “The fact Sean Zeisz was not involved in the Hyundai does not show he’s not guilty of the main charges, but it does show it is to the evidence you must pay attention. Not the Crown’s various case theories. You start to try and shape the facts to fit your theory rather than forming theory according to the fact. Look at the facts and see what you make of the facts independent of any theorising.
“On the facts, what there is, is mum and the Sunday lunch and the third interview. No DNA, no fingerprints, no ANPR, no unique telecomms gap. It is only because of that first interview that the prosecution have formed their theory, which they will not let go no matter what the evidence shows.
“Now, we come to the background. What do you know about Sean Zeisz? Second, his conduct. Thirdly what he does. Fourthly who he is. Fifthly what do we know about what happened before Glastonbury, at Glastonbury and after Glastonbury.
“You’ve heard a lot about Sean Zeisz. A lot of it isn’t very good. The Crown have not suggested he had any dealings with or access to firearms. He is someone who would spin anything for money. A car, cocaine. He was in a volatile relationship with Olivia McDowell. we’ve heard from her own cousin, Mr F*itzgibbon, that she gives as good as she gets.
“Nothing excuses those text messages. He doesn’t try to excuse them. He knows they were wrong, but that’s all they were. Messages. Empty, petty. No follow-through. He never harmed her, or even Dusty. We will come to what he did do, but they were petty, full of empty bluster and bravado and a coward.
“Let’s look at what the full messaging shows you.”
Mr Davis reads: “Oh my god what happened with Zest and Liv’. And then Ashley says: ‘Zest got smacked Saturday night by Joker and that. Dusty hit him too. I dunno if Liv got hit’.”
Mr Davis: “At no point do we suggest Ashley Dale is lying or trying to be misleading. But pretty much everything she tells people has come from Lee Harrison or Liv McDowell or who knows who else. Very little of what she says is first hand. She is in a volatile relationship with Lee Harrison, and we suggest, although it is a matter for you, that Liv McDowell clearly thrives on drama. We suggest she is not a reliable narrator. She’s hardly going to say anything to Ashley that makes her look bad. She will blame everyone else, not least Sean Zeisz.
“You may think the Crown from the outset have tried to use this message to point to Dusty as being responsible for the assault on Sean Zeisz in Glastonbury. It suited their case theory, not because that’s what the evidence showed.
“Ashley says ‘from Joker and that’. That bit was right. But then she says ‘Dusty hit him too’ and Liv legged Zest’. You heard from Sean Zeisz himself, far from legging him, she came back to the tent an hour or so later. We will see if the messages after prove Ashley Dale right or that Sean Zeisz was telling the truth. There is no evidence that ‘Joker and that’ are Hillsiders. There is no evidence of a connection. No one who was actually involved supports the idea Dusty hit Sean Zeisz, let alone Liv had been hit. This is a comment the Crown built their evidence on. The entire foundation of their motive can be traced back to this, this one message, as far as Sean Zeisz was concerned.
“Even here, it’s a motive to go after Dusty. If not after Liv. Even if Dusty is the apparent culprit, it’s not Lee.”
Mr Davis turns to messages from June 29, sent at 21.16, from Ashley to Liv.
Ashley said: “He’s obviously just fuming isn’t he. He’s taken it out on you. You tried your best to try and keep the peace. It’s all kicked off, but you haven’t done nothing wrong. He’s obviously gonna be *advertiser censored***** fuming because of everything that’s happened. He’s gonna be on one. You’re just gonna have to give him a few days.”
Mr Davis: “Liv is hardly going to own up to being part of the relationship problem. Ashley referring to keeping the peace is over Glastonbury, not some major long running beef. How long does she think Zest will be fuming for? A few days.”
He reads more from the messages: “You might have been around us for what, an hour on Sunday? But you went back to the tent. I wouldn't even worry.”
Mr Davis: “There it is. When you talk about Liv legging Sean, it’s about an hour. It’s exactly what Sean Zeisz told you in evidence, she came back to the tent. There is Ashley saying it, proving that first statement was inaccurate.”
Mr Davis reads from Liv’s response.
OM: “I’d rather split up with him rather than fall out with everyone. This is why I tried to keep the peace. I can’t be assed with that life. Why is he speaking to Saz? If Branch is his mate. Then he’s arguing with everyone for Branch. You’re going to fall out with everyone over Branch then speak to Lee. I told him Lee was asking about him. It’s got nothing to do with Lee. Lee tried to stop it. I’ve had enough, falling out with everyone. I’m stuck in the middle like yous. He might not be arsed but I am. My life is so hard. It’s just a mad one”
Mr Davis: “These young men and women obviously have a wide circle of friends, acquaintances, friends of friends. Can you imagine the number of disputes, fallings out, I don’t know what the plural of ‘beef’ is. Do you think there is only one or two beefs? They would all fall in and out of love, in and out of friendship. The Crown’s world view is as simplistic as it is unrealistic. Liv talks about falling out with everyone. Either she’s exaggerating or there are numerous tensions at play here.
“She’s actually complaining that Sean Zeisz is remaining friends with Branch and Lee Harrison. Branch is being criticised for remaining neutral. ‘My life is so hard+’. Really? An unreliable narrator. Self pity and drama in all her messages. Her life is so hard because she has to move back in with her nan after her breakup with Sean.”
Mr Davis reads a message from Ashley: “You’ve got people in Glastonbury threatening you, they’re gonna give you leggys and whatever, Spud and that. He’ll come over and speak to Lee and me. Lee did try and keep the peace. Lee said to Wally, lad just leave it. Wally just done whatever. I didn’t see it, I weren't there.”
Mr Davis: “That’s a very important message. First Ashley is saying Lee is being threatened by the likes of Spud. it is not Zest or anyone linked to Zest. Maybe yet another beef. Far more importantly Ashley confirms Sean would speak to Lee. Lee stood up for him. These are the circumstances from which Sean Zeisz is meant to have wanted his friend dead. The Crown’s case simply does not make sense.
“We know now Wally and Joker have nothing to do with issues Lee has with anyone else. It’s a totally different friend who has owed money. Nothing to do with Branch and Lee Harrison, and nothing to do with Dusty even. What is Sean Zeisz being cricitised for? Taking sides? No.
Mr Davis reads from Liv’s message: “He doesn’t speak to Branch. He’s been distant from Branch for about a year. When he had murder with that Spud, Branch just got on him dead random. He’s not spoke to Branch. Even when he did speak to him it was dead distant. He’s never there through anything Sean goes through cos of him.”
Mr Davis: “It really puts paid to the theory Mr Zeisz has preferred Mr Barry over Lee Harrison. Distant with Barry, not spoken to him once. Barry never there for Zeisz.
He reads again from Ashley’s messges: “I don’t know what goes through Sean’s head. You can’t be in the middle of everything. You’ve got to pick your side. You’re sitting with Saz then arguing with people for Branch.”
Mr Davis: “We have the girls totally exploding the Crown’s case theory. You can’t be in the middle. She’s complaining he’s not picking a side. He’s being criticised for doing the opposite of what the Crown need him to do for their case theory.”

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[Legally Bland]

11:29JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

Zeisz's 'beef was with Dusty, nothing to do with Lee Harrison'​

Mr Davis: “Now we come to the first tragedy in all of this. Rikki Warnick’s suicide. What a sad loss. He seems to have been well-liked by everyone within this extended group of friends. Far, far too young. Whether Dusty was to blame in some way or not, it’s not our job to say. The general view was he was to blame and Sean Zeisz firmly believed it.
“By July 21, Sean Zeisz has been punched, embarrassed at Glastonbury. he’s broken up at least partially with Liv McDowell. he goes abroad for a stag weekend then a break. He gets the shocking news Rikki has died. Add to that the news from his friends that Liv is being seen around Dusty. Whether that is romantic as some suggest perhaps matters little. Can you think of a worse point for Sean Zeisz? The height of his anger, pain and upset can be seen in the messages with Niall Barry from Portugal.”
Mr Davis reads the messages, sent on July 22, the day after Rikki’s suicide.
SZ: “Lad Rikki has killed himself.”
NB: “What.”
SZ: “Ricky dead. Do me a favour bro. My bird car on Dusty path. Go smash the window screen now. Are you by ours?”
Mr Davis: “At the moment of his greatest grief. That’s it. It’s not great. It’s petty, it’s mean but it is said in high emotion. That’s the height of what he wants done. Break her windscreen. There is no hint of shoot up his house or shoot them. Nothing but smash her window. It’s almost childish, petty in the extreme. That’s his level. He’s petty in high emotion, no more than that.”
Mr Davis reads: SZ: “Please bro, smash her car up
NB: “Yeah man
SZ: “Asap. please bro please, brick her window. Please bro, right now. Brick her windows.”
Mr Davis: “Dusty has Liv at his. Dusty has been bullying Rikki, leading in Sean Zeisz’s mind to Rikkis tragic death. This is who Sean Zeisz has beef with. It’s nothing to do with Lee Harrison. at the height of his emotion."
He reads more of the messages:
SZ: “He threw himself under Huyton train station. Been crying all night. Lad, can’t even talk. And then found out me bird sleeping in Dusty’s.”
NB: “What going on here lad”
SZ: “Jamie stabbed all the tyres before for me. Fly there now. While they asleep, smash windscreen for me.”
Mr Davis: “There is a voice note asking him to get stuff out of their flat. He just wanted to clear it all out. He’s had enough of her. He feels betrayed, partially because she’s taken up with someone viewed as a but because she was a friend of Rikki’s too. It was a betrayal of Rikki. That’s who he had beef with. Nothing to do with Ashley or Lee. not remotely.”

11:41JONATHAN HUMPHRIES

Messages from Zeisz to girlfriend 'disgusting and vile' but 'empty threats'​

Mr Davis refers to Witham and Barry’s trip to Wales. He says it was “Nothing to do with Sean Zeisz”.
AD: “He’s accepted he buys and sells a kilo of cocaine to turn a profit. He does some trading with Mr Barry, but that is a far cry from having any involvement with the Kyle Line. There is no evidence he had anything to do with the Kyle Line.
“There are no facts to help. There is no ANPR of Mr Zeisz’s old Mercedes anywhere near Rhyl or North Wales. There are no phone records. There is no contact with relevant people. It’s a pure red herring, trying to add some ballast to their weak case theory. They are keen to make a close link between Mr Barry and Mr Zeisz. We ask you to fit the theory to the facts.
“And now we come to a part of the case where Mr Zeisz does not cover himself in glory. The messages with Liv. Disgusting, vile and mean but petty and childish also. A man scorned. A man betrayed, in his mind, and his nose rubbed in it with a man he blames for the death of his dear friend. It’s all about Dusty, not Ashley, not Lee.
“Yes he gives more than he takes in this exchange, but you’ve seen Liv’s messages. She’s volatile, she’s difficult. Perhaps it gives some explanation to Mr Zeisz’s messages, but no excuse. Sean said he was embarrassed to high heaven that he’d sent those awful messages. Abusive, rude, threatening but as ever empty threats. No harm ever came to Liv or Dusty. You may think should be enemy number one, but no harm came to him. This was jealousy and hurt giving rise to spite and vitriol. He made, you may think, horrible but empty threats to Liv. No one touched a hair on her head.
“It proves he hated Dusty. He was very conflicted with Liv, but he was all full of bluster. Like a boy on the playground pulling a girl’s pigtails.
“Sean Zeisz cut short his time in Portugal and flew home the same day he heard, or even the next day. It shows how important Rikki was to him.”
Mr Davis reads messages from July 13.
Ashley Dale to Lydia “just all drama with Zest and Branch and Liv, cba.”
Mr Davis: “The drama is again with Branch, not Zest. Yes Zest and Liv having their relationship might have raised the temperature, but no more than that. It’s not Zest that has a problem with anyone with Liv and Dusty.”
He reads: “Liv seeing Dusty isn’t she, she’s been caught. All madness been happening this week. It’s half brought everything to the surface with Branch and Lee. He was saying he was coming Tuesday, but he never came.”
Mr Davis: “Ashley is gossipping about whatever Lee told her. Lydia is just regurgitating what Lee said to Ashley. It’s all half or fake, none of it is significant or reliable.”
He reads:
Lydia: “Why have they dragged Lee into something to do with Liv and Zest?”
Ashley: “Half just cos Lee is mates with Dusty. Lee speaks to Zest. It’s all *advertiser censored**ed up. Everyone’s fake.”
Mr Davis: “The problem with Dusty and Liv over rikki’s death, fuming at Dusty. When Ashley says Dusty was involved in Glastonbury, she does not know. That’s either what she’s misunderstood or just got the wrong end up the stick.”
He reads:
Lydia: “What the *advertiser censored** though, that’s nothing to do with Lee. I can’t believe Liv. Why did they break up again Zest and Liv?”
Ashley: “She found out he’d been cheating on her again. They split up when they got home. She gives me anxiety though.”
Mr Davis: “Lydia is asking about Lee being dragged into it. Ashley thinks that because that’s what Lee told her. Everyone who was there has disproved that. Mr Zeisz himself has nothing good to say about Dusty. Liv herself to the police. Sean’s cousin. It was nothing to do with Dusty. You’ve seen the picture of him on the night after. Hardly any damage. One punch seems likely.
“It’s an interesting insight into Liv, though, Ashley saying ‘she gives me anxiety’. Is she (Liv) high maintenance, is she a drama queen?”
Mr Davis read:
Lydia: “Is Zest proper fuming at Dusty?”
Ashley “yeah and he’s took all her clothes and put her tyres down….
She talks about the attack on Zeisz by Wally and Joker, then adds: “Dusty just got involved cos he felt like it”
Mr Davis: “Dusty didn’t get involved with it, Ladies and Gentlemen. The only argument was with Joker and Wally.”

Ashley Dale murder trial as it happens

The 28-year-old was shot dead at her home on Leinster Road in Old Swan

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk