But you were separated from your sister at some point?
But you were separated from your sister at some point?
When she was sixteen, Angie disappeared from our foster home and never came back.
Diane had been fourteen when Angie left. It had been 1988, the year of the Lockerbie bomb, the year Salman Rushdie went into hiding and George Bush Senior became president of the USA.
The small details were impressed on Frys mind. The last memory that she had of her sister, Angie unusually excited as she pulled on her jeans to go out that night. She was off to a rave somewhere. There was a boy who was picking her up. Diane had wanted to know where, but Angie had laughed and said it was a secret. Raves were always held in secret locations, otherwise the police would be there first and stop them. But they were doing no harm, just having fun. And Angie had gone out that night, with their foster parents making only a token attempt to find out where she was going. Angie had already been big trouble for them by then, and was getting out of hand.
Looking back, Fry knew she had been unable to believe anything bad of Angie then. Every time theyd been moved from one foster home to another, it had been their foster parents fault, not Angies. And when Angie had finally disappeared from her life, the young Diane had been left clutching an idealized image of her, like a final, faded photograph. The memory still brought the same feelings of anger and unresolved pain. Feelings that revolved around Angie.
Of course, she was already using heroin by then.
Fry wasnt sure whether shed said that out loud. But she could see from Murchisons expression that shed heard it. And again, it seemed to be the right reply, although it had slipped out without any thought this time. The room began to feel like a confessional, the place to get any of those psychological hangups off her chest.
She supposed that was the theory, anyway. So along as she could talk about it, she must be all right. If only it was that simple.
And what of your parents? asked Murchison.
My real parents? said Fry. I remember almost nothing of them.
Nothing?
Almost nothing.
But your mother?
She died, they told me. My father is just a blank. Hes not even on my birth certificate.
Murchison nodded. And how do you feel about your family now?
Its all history, said Fry.
Youre saying youve moved on, Diane?
Absolutely.
Im glad to hear that. Its possible to get eaten up by guilt over things that are no fault of yours. Theres no point in feeling guilty all the time. It has a very negative effect.
Why would I feel guilty? Theres no reason for me to feel guilty about anything.
Its common to have irrational feelings that we cant explain the reasons for.
We?
Murchison took no notice.
During this process, well be trying to uncover any hidden memories that you may have, Diane.
Hidden memories? Something else Im not aware of?
Those hidden memories are vital, both for their evidential value and for your own closure.
Fry watched Murchison tidy away her folder. She wondered if the counsellor felt as though shed got inside the victims head, and satisfied herself that she was psychologically fit for the ordeal to come. Did Rachel Murchison now think that she understood Diane Fry?
Looking at the clock, Fry stood up first and shook hands. A lot of what had just been said sounded like bullshit. But Murchison had been right about one thing. She did need to be in control.
Like all the best detectives, DI Gareth Blake had a sidekick. He was an Asian detective sergeant, very smart, very bright, named Gorpal Sandhu. Though he said very little, Fry observed in him the same watchfulness. Perhaps, after all, it was characteristic of everyone in West Midlands Police. If so, she had forgotten it, had never noticed it when she served in Birmingham herself.
So have you kept in touch with any of your old colleagues in the West Midlands, Diane? asked Blake after the introductions.
No, not with anyone.
Really? Not even DC Kewley?
No one.
Thats a bit unusual.
Perhaps. I dont know.
Fry thought it ought to be obvious that shed wanted to put that part of her life behind her. Yes, it was true that her previous service with West Midlands Police was a memory she almost cherished sometimes, whenever she looked out at the primitive rural wasteland shed condemned herself to in Derbyshire.
But that was an idealized image shed created for herself, a long way from the reality. In fact, she had left Birmingham without a farewell to any of her colleagues. No leaving party, no parting gifts, no cards wishing her all the best in the future. She might as well have said: Im going out now. I may be some time.
Blake and Sandhu were watching her, politely waiting until they had her attention again.
Im sorry if Im teaching my grandmother to suck eggs, Diane, said Blake. But we do have to go through the processes.
I know.
At the evidential stage, the CPS have to be satisfied first of all that theres enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction. That means that a jury is more likely than not to convict. Normally, if a case doesnt pass the evidential stage, it wont go ahead.
Yes.
If the case does pass the evidential stage, the CPS has to decide whether a prosecution is in the public interest. If the evidential test is passed, rape is believed to be so serious that a prosecution is almost certainly required in the public interest. Okay so far?
Absolutely.
Now. When considering the public interest stage, one of the factors that Crown Prosecutors will take into account is the consequences for the victim of the decision whether or not to prosecute, and any views expressed by the victim or the victims family.
Paragraph 5.12 of the Crown Prosecutors Code. Striking a balance between the interests of the victim and the public interest.
Exactly. As Im sure you know, the definition of rape was substantially changed by the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Offences committed before 1st May 2004 are still prosecuted under the Sexual Offences Act 1956.
And under the 1956 Act, its a defence if the defendant believed the victim was consenting, even if the belief was unreasonable.
Im afraid reasonableness is a matter of fact for the jury. Not for us.
You said the case was re-opened on the basis of intelligence, said Fry.
Yes.
And now you have a suspect.
Two suspects, in fact, said Blake. Their names are Marcus Shepherd and Darren Joseph Barnes. We had an element of luck, actually. Our primary suspect had a DNA sample taken when he was arrested for robbery and possession of a firearm. Criminals dont just commit sexual offences, but other offences too.
Are they in custody?
Arrested and bailed.
What? Theyre out on the street?
Diane, you know we have to get all the evidence together that we need for an airtight case. Evidential value is crucial. But forensic techniques have improved. Were very hopeful.
We had information, credible enough to arrest two suspects, put in Sandhu. We took fingerprints and buccal swabs as per procedure, and we got a hit on the database.
From both?
Just the one, he said. But we believe they were together. The lab might be able to get a new DNA profile from the exhibits in storage. New techniques are available. Low copy number.
Yes.
DNA techniques had advanced significantly over the last twenty years in terms of sensitivity, reliability, and speed of results. They had become really important in revisiting old cases, reviewing the evidence recovered at the time. Preservation must have been good in Birmingham, because DNA deteriorated after a while. DNA evidence had to be looked at in terms of preservation. If it was kept cold and dry, it lasted an awful lot longer. It was theoretically possible to obtain DNA profiles from samples over a hundred years old, provided it was known how theyd been preserved.
Forensically, it could all go horribly wrong before it ever got into the courtroom. The collecting and handling of evidence was so important.
There had been no witnesses to the assault that she could remember, and certainly none had come forward at the time. There had been plenty of appeals, of course. Lots of trawling from house to house in the area, hours spent stopping cars that used the nearby roads, and talking to motorists, lots of effort put into leaning on informants who might have heard a murmur on the streets. All to no avail. It was an offence with no witnesses other than the perpetrators and the victim.
Apart from her own statement, the only evidence Fry had of the attack were bruises and abrasions. And those faded with time, leaving only the crime-scene photographers prints to pass around a jury. As for the psychological scarswell, they didnt show up too well in court.
But now they had a credible witness report, as well as an e-fit record that had been kept in the imaging unit, and a copy of the file retained by the FSS. So where had this new witness come from?
According to Blake, this person was on witness protection. They could be putting themselves at serious risk to testify. Someone had done some smooth talking, or exerted the right kind of pressure.
Blake was busy giving her the bad news, touching on the six per cent conviction rate for rape cases.
Im afraid the conviction rate in rape cases is still very low in this country.
Yes, I know that.
Blake tilted his head in acknowledgement. Of course you do. And Im sure youre aware, too, that theres a lot of pressure to improve conviction rates.
Absolutely. The inference from the poor figures being that the police dont take rape allegations seriously enough.
Well, thats a perception the public might take away from the statistics. We know it isnt true, though, dont we? Generally speaking. There are lots of other factors that make convictions difficult to achieve, especially in cases where the defendant is known to the victim.
Like the fact that its impossible to provide objective evidence on whether consent was given.
Exactly. It always comes down to one persons word against anothers. And juries dont like that. They want to be presented with evidence. Were handicapped by those old-fashioned notions of people being innocent until proven guilty, and having to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. When its just a question of he says, she says, theres always going to be room for reasonable doubt. One persons truth is someone elses lie. We all know that. It would take a poor barrister not to ram the point firmly into the heads of a jury.