| The Dream Solution
- Documents |
21/06/95 - 2nd Affidavit of P B O'Mahoney
This is the 2nd Affidavit of P B O'Mahoney sworn on behalf
of the Defendant on 21 June 1995
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
CHANCERY DIVISION BETWEEN:
(1) MICHELLE TAYLOR
(2) LISA BUCK (nee TAYLOR)
Plaintiffs
and
PATRICK BERNARD O'MAHONEY
(aka BERNARD PATRICK O'MAHONEY, PATRICK LAWSON and BERNARD
KING)
Defendant
AFFIDAVIT OF PATRICK BERNARD LAWSON O'MAHONEY
I, PATRICK BERNARD LAWSON O'MAHONEY, of Basildon, Essex, MAKE
OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS:
1.
I am the Defendant in these proceedings. I make this Affidavit
further to my First Affidavit sworn on 13th June 1995 and
in response to the Second Affidavit of Michelle Ann Taylor.
This Affidavit is made from matters within my own knowledge
unless otherwise stated.
I do not intend to reply to each and every point raised by
Michelle Taylor in her Affidavits and the Affidavits sworn
on behalf of the Plaintiffs, but where I do not reply specifically
I should not be taken to be accepting what she or they say.
MY BACKGROUND
2.
The document that is included as exhibit "MT8" was
prepared by a journalist friend of mine, John Griffin, with
whom I cooperated in writing a book based on my life. While
the essential underlying facts outlined in that synopsis are
true, they were selected by John Griffin as the most sensational
highlights.
As I hope I made clear in my earlier Affidavit, since I met
Debra in my mid 20's, I have settled down and tried to put
my violent past behind me. The "violent crimes"
that Michelle Taylor refers to are all more than 10 years
ago.
So far as South Africa is concerned, I was arrested in connection
with a nightclub brawl. I was charged with assault. I did
not "threaten to kill two people", nor was I charged
with "threatening to kill two people, assault, wounding
and illegal possession of firearms".
3.
I am presently registered disabled and I cannot and do not
work. Miss Hunter was given incorrect information by Basildon
Police. My disability arose as a result of an operation some
1and half years ago that was carried out to try and repair
injuries suffered by me as a result of an attack in 1990.
When I used to work, I ran the door at Raquel's Nightclub.
A friend of mine is now running that door and I do occasionally
go to Raquel's Nightclub to see him. I am not working that
door and i am not receiving any income in this regard: however
it is generally known as my door and I do intend to return
there when eventually I have recovered.
4.
I wish to make my position regarding my correspondence with
the Plaintiffs in this action and with other prisoners completely
clear. I have always written a lot of letters. I write to
someone just about every day. This probably started initially
because of the nomadic life I used to lead. I often write
to my friends and family. I have also written a lot of letters
in connection with my charity work. As a result of my own
history, I have always been interested in what makes people
turn to crime.
My own experience indicates it is usually because of their
childhood experiences. I have known Gary Jones for at least
ten years. In 1991 he suggested I should correspond with Peter
Sutcliffe, explaining that since the telephone calls to Sutcliffe
had been by a woman reporter I had to correspond with him
as a woman. I did expect to get paid for this if the correspondence
was subsequently published, which, in the event, it was not,
due to publication of the Barbara Jones book.
There is now produced and shown to me marked "POM8"
a true copy of the letter under cover of which I think I received
the undertaking exhibited to my First Affidavit: I received
four undertakings from Sutcliffe all along substantially similar
lines when he was urging "Belinda" to visit him.
As will be seen, Sutcliffe was pressing for a meeting with
"Belinda". Clearly that was impossible, and the
correspondence stopped.
I admit I subsequently tried to sell those letters. This business
with Sutcliffe was a unique situation. As stated in my previous
Affidavit, I corresponded with Blenkey the child murderer
as part of a News of the World investigation, which resulted
in his conviction.
I was paid for this. I have written to other criminals, usually
on my own initiative (although on one occasion at the request
of the police themselves) and for my own interest although
I have discussed with a publisher whether if I gather enough
material that is sufficiently interesting, I could publish
a book about criminals.
I have not sold any of these letters and I have not been paid
to do any of this correspondence. On occasion I have introduced
journalists to my correspondents (with the full knowledge
of the prisoner in question, who put the journalist's name
forward on their visiting order).
I did not get paid by the journalists on these occasions .
Excluding the Taylor sisters, I have corresponded with approximately
12 other prisoners.
5.
I consider the correspondence with the Taylor sisters to be
in a completely different category. I confirm that I wrote
to them unprompted by Gary Jones (or anyone else). The News
of the World was not involved in this correspondence and did
not initiate it or encourage it at all. Had I wished to sell
stories about the Taylor sisters, I would have done so long
ago, when several stories that I knew had a newsworthy value.
I was convinced that they were innocent. I followed the trial
very closely and it seemed to me that all the prosecution
evidence was circumstantial, to say the least. I really and
truly believed that the Taylor sisters were the victims of
a miscarriage of justice. I threw myself wholeheartedly into
trying to prove this.
6.
I note that Michelle Taylor does not deny that I carried out
a very great deal of work at my own expense, in driving the
campaign to overturn their conviction. I have noted the Affidavit
of Michael Holmes, and in particular what he says regarding
the grounds that the Court of Appeal relied on in overturning
the conviction.
There is now produced and shown to me marked "POM9"
a true copy of the article published on 7th June 1993 in Today
newspaper, (unprompted by me) shortly before the appeal was
to start. In that article, the newspaper reports on the "dramatic
new evidence" that the Plaintiffs' solicitors intended
to present to the Court of Appeal.
At least some of this evidence was referred to in the submissions
made to the Court of Appeal. That new evidence and the questions
raised, were largely generated by me.
7.
I also refer to the letters included in exhibit "POM7"
to my First Affidavit. In several of those letters Michelle
Taylor criticised the manner in which the solicitors (by whom
she meant Michael Holmes at that stage) were handling the
preparation of the appeal.
She said she was unhappy about the prospect of his wife writing
a book and was unhappy that his wife appeared to have been
given access to the papers for this purpose. She even asked
me about how to get rid of him just prior to the appeal. I
advised her that at the Court of Appeal her Counsel would
be in charge, and that changing solicitors at this stage would
only delay matters.
8.
In 1994 I gave a full statement to the police concerning the
assistance that I gave to the Taylors in preparing the evidence
for their appeal. I was asked to give this statement in the
context of the allegations that the Taylors had made against
the investigating officers. I have already told the police
of the steps that were taken to undermine the trial evidence.
For example, as I stated in my first Affidavit, the Plaintiffs'
father and I traced and retraced the route that the police
alleged the Taylor sisters had taken using a video recorder
to verify the timing. We discarded the numerous occasions
on which we succeeded in beating the police time. On one occasion
we succeeded in driving the route in a little over 8 minutes,
although we claimed we had never been able to do it under
14 minutes.
Pressure was put upon J J Tapp, a key prosecution witness,
to withdraw the statement that she had previously made to
the police. I discouraged journalists from seeking to trace
the "homeless man" who, it had been alleged, had
confessed to murdering a girl in Battersea at the relevant
time, in order to prevent him from being eliminated from the
investigation and I encouraged witnesses to make false statements,
which they did do.
9.
I was not the source of the story that appeared in the News
of the World in July 1992. In her first Affidavit, Michelle
Taylor appeared to be in some confusion with regard to the
allegation she was seeking to make. She referred specifically
to a similar letter that she had written to another person
at about the same time.
As Michelle Taylor is well aware, she discovered during the
time that she was in prison that many of the letters that
she and Lisa Taylor were writing were being photocopied and
circulated among news agencies, presumably by prison staff.
In prison, a prisoner's letters are placed unsealed for collection
and censoring prior to postage.
A concession was made in the Taylor sisters' favour that all
their outgoing letters would be censored and then sealed in
their presence in the Governor's office, directly as a result
of the fact that their letters were, it appeared, being photocopied
and touted around Fleet Street.
If the News of the World did indeed at that time have a copy
of Michelle Taylor's letter to me, which was sent prior to
this concession being granted, it must have been obtained
from someone other than me.
I was not the source of this story. This intrusion at the
prison was not confined to letters. Michelle Taylor learned
that her telephone calls were also being taped, allegedly
by prison staff. I refer specifically to the letter to me
that appears at pages 178-179 of exhibit "POM7".
10.
I received no payment whatsoever for the use of the excerpt
of the letter in the article as has been alleged.
11.
Michelle Taylor's account of the breakup of our relationship
is complete fiction. I moved into Michelle and Lisa's flat
at Brockley Rise shortly after the Court of Appeal hearing
overturning their convictions. Michelle and I started an affair
but during the period we had numerous rows, mostly because
I wouldn't show her any commitment, and because of her obsessive
nature. We also argued about John Shaughnessy because she
still had feelings for him that I found hard to understand.
By then, a substantial part of the book had been written.
Parts of it had been sent to the Taylor sisters in prison.
They were very pleased with the draft. It had originally been
envisaged that Michelle would work on contributions to the
book while she was in prison but, as she herself acknowledged
in her letters, the scale of the project was completely beyond
her capabilities. The papers were returned by the Taylor sisters'
solicitors to the flat where we were all living at the time.
Subsequently Ray Buck stayed with Lisa at the flat but not
full time (because at the time he was still engaged to a girl
called Claire) and the four of us shared the flat. Any one
of the four of us could have had completely free access to
the papers, which included the tape recordings of the interviews
with the police and included, for example, evidence that had
not been relied upon at the initial trial, such as a statement
that was taken from a man whose name I cannot now recall in
which he claimed he had seen a white car parked at the top
of Varden's Road near the Roundhouse Pub at the relevant time.
12.
I never doubted the Taylor sisters' innocence until I discovered
the letter that I referred to in paragraph 12 of my First
Affidavit. I recall very clearly that Michelle was out at
the time. I was sitting in the front room of the flat on the
floor, looking through a box of case papers marked "Unused".
I was particularly looking for further information about "the
homeless man" David Wylie.
I came across photographs of the Taylor sisters on an identity
parade that took place, if I correctly recall, at Victoria
British Rail Station. I then came across the letter in question.
The letter was on headed paper, typed, and some 5 or 6 lines
long. I am sure that the letter came from a solicitors office
although I cannot now be certain of the identity of the person
writing the letter or to whom it was addressed, but it definitely
referred to Michelle making admissions to a solicitor, not
to the police, and whoever was writing definitely referred
to advice being given to Lisa to be a prosecution witness.
My understanding is that both Lisa and Michelle were represented
by the same firm of solicitors, Messrs. Andrew Keenan &
Co, but were represented by different personnel in that firm,
at least initially. My understanding is that Lisa was represented
by Mr Holmes, and Michelle was represented by one Patricia
Lister. Patricia Lister was certainly present throughout the
trial, although it appears she is not admitted as a solicitor.
She was with Michelle when she was interviewed at Wandsworth
police station. The letter may well have been written by Patricia
Lister. As soon as I read the letter I knew what it meant.
It meant that Michelle had confessed to at least being involved
in the murder but had indicated her sister was innocent. I
felt completely cold.
I had been conned. All my work, and all the money I had spent
in proving the Taylor sisters' innocence had been completely
misplaced. All the hard work that I had put into a book that
was formulated on the basis that they were innocent was completely
wasted. I had risked prosecution for falsifying evidence and
committing crimes on their behalf for nothing.
A lot of the evidence fell into place: Lisa's fingerprints
in the flat and her hollow excuse that she had some weeks
earlier been at the flat to clean it, having previously denied
ever being there; the confirmatory statement about seeing
a white car at the top of Varden's Road; the fact that J J
Tapp was adamant she had told the truth at trial, despite
my attempts to get her to change her story, the cashpoint
transaction and their general attitude to the murder, including
Michelle's inability to explain the comments that she had
written in her diary concerning Alison Shaughnessy when we
were discussing the book.
13.
I waited for Michelle to come in. She came in about 10 minutes
after I had found the letter. I handed the letter to her and
demanded she explain it. She went white. She didn't really
read the letter in full: she seemed to recognise it, she screwed
it up and she threw it on the floor. I said "Well explain
it Michelle". She started shouting and swearing, calling
me a bastard and saying "You've never believed in our
innocence". I said I had until then.
She got even more annoyed and walked out of the front room
and slammed the door, shouting "You fucking bastard"
at the top of her voice. I had got up off the floor while
waiting for Michelle to return home and was now sitting on
the settee. Suddenly there was a loud bang and the door flew
open. She came storming back into the room and she shouted
at me "John Shaughnessy is twice the man you are".
She shouted at me that she didn't care about me and still
loved John. I bent down, picked up the piece of paper and
said in a voice loud enough to be heard over her shouting,
"Explain this, go on just explain this". She continued
to shout and be abusive, but after a short while she broke
down and began to cry. She sat down next to me on the settee
but I didn't want to be near her so I stood up.
She blurted out "It wasn't my fucking fault it was Alison's",
and before I could say anything she told me that Alison (whom
she had pretended to befriend) had told her that Alison and
John intended going back home to Ireland to live and have
a baby and start afresh. Although John and Alison had been
married for slightly less than a year, Michelle had it firmly
in her mind they were not having an active sex life.
In Michelle's mind, this statement from Alison meant that
John was two timing her (Michelle) with Alison. It seemed
that John had previously introduced Michelle as his wife to
some of his friends, even though he had a longstanding relationship
with Alison and had married her. Michelle saw herself and
John as a couple and Alison as the interloper.
Michelle said that John had told her that they were not going
back to Ireland and would not be starting a family and that
he wanted to be with Michelle. She gave the impression that
she thought Alison was lying in order to hurt her. She said
she had lost weight and couldn't sleep and it was making her
ill. She said "On that Monday I told Lisa I was going
to have it out with Alison and she said she would go with
me".
She said that she had taken "the ruler" from her
father's tools , but Lisa didn't know. The "ruler"
was a steel ruler which had been sharpened to a knife point.
Later the Taylor sisters' father was prosecuted for having
an offensive weapon in respect of this ruler. Michelle said
they drove to Varden's Road and parked near the Roundhouse
Pub, which is at the top of Varden's Road and from where they
would have had a clear view of Varden's Road.
Varden's Road has terraced houses, with car parking on the
street outside and it is almost impossible to park near to
specific properties. Michelle said that when they saw Alison
walking up the road she and Lisa got out of the car. They
met Alison coming up the road. Michelle told Alison that John
had sent her to collect some plant pots for the Clinic which
were too heavy for him to take on the train.
Michelle said that Alison let them in the front door and then
opened the door of her flat. Lisa stood at the door to the
flat (where her fingerprints were subsequently found) and
held the flat door open. She said that Alison went up the
stairs, with Michelle following behind her. Michelle became
more upset as she made her confession. She had been crying
throughout, but at this point became totally distraught.
She kept saying "I only meant to scare her, I only meant
to scare her". I said "Well what happened".
She said "I don't know what happened, I grabbed her from
behind, I stabbed her and everything else is a blur".
She continued "Me and Lee just ran from the flat, we
drove back to the Clinic and put all of our stuff (by which
I understood her to mean her bloodstained clothes and the
ruler) into a sports bag."
Michelle's account was interspersed with lots of swearing.
She said that she simply "couldn't fucking stand it no
more". She showed no remorse at all although she seemed
concerned to explain Lisa's role and to make it clear that
Lisa did not know she had taken the ruler. During her recital
many of the facts that I had read or been aware of fell into
placle.
The story made sense from the point of view of the evidence
that I had seen. For example, it was entirely consistent with
the fact that none of Lisa's fingerprints were found anywhere
else and the fingerprint expert's evidence that her prints
were only 72 hours old. It was consistent with the fact that
there was no evidence of a break in and that Alison's body
was found with the mail and with the mortice lock off.
I called Michelle a few names. I left immediately without
stopping to collect more of my things from the flat. I told
her I didn't want to have anything to do with her any more.
When I left her she was very very distressed.
14.
The following day, or the day after, I went back to the flat
for my belongings and Lisa was there. I told her what had
gone on and she said she knew, Michelle had asked her to talk
to me. Lisa said Michelle hadn't meant what she had said about
John and handed me an envelope from Michelle. I usually got
a letter from her after we had had an argument. I think the
envelope contained two letters, one marked "Letter No
2".
That letter is exhibited to my First Affidavit as page 167
of exhibit "POM7". I cannot now find letter number
one. I said I wasn't bothered about her feelings for John,
I was bothered because I had been conned into believing they
were both innocent. Lisa said "Forget it, its not important.
I could admit it to you today, then in six months time say
I was only joking, you would never know if I was telling the
truth".
I told Lisa she was insulting my intelligence, and if she
had any sense she would distance herself from her sister and
live her own life as Michelle was "rucked up". Lisa
didn't reply. She gave me a photograph of herself with "To
my best friend always" written on it. I collected some
of my belongings and left.
15.
I cannot remember the exact date on which Michelle made her
confession, but it would have been in October 1993. It would
probably have been on a Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday: at that
time, as I have indicated above, Ray Buck was living in the
flat with us, and was employed by me as a doorman at Raquel's
Nightclub. I had paid him about £140 in advance for
Thursday, Friday and Saturday night at Raquel's Nightclub.
He did not turn up for work on those nights, which meant I
was out of pocket because I had to arrange for another doorman
to cover and pay that doorman myself. It is fair to say that
during the course of the 1-2 weeks immediately following Michelle's
confession there were other rows, for example when I went
back to collect my things. On one evening in particular, I
went back to the flat and let myself in because at that point
I still had my key. Michelle was there on her own, feeling
a bit sorry for herself.
She threw herself at me. She said, again and again, that she
didn't mean what she had said to me about John Shaughnessy
being a better man than me and that she didn't want us to
fall out. What was incredible, to my mind, was that she totally
ignored the fact that she had confessed to murder. She seemed
to think that it could all be sorted out. I said "I don't
want fuck all to do with you". I didn't want any long
discussions with her. She kept saying that we could sort it
out and I kept saying no. I didn't want to sort it out. Finally
she accepted that our relationship was going no where and
that I was not coming back.
16.
Two of the notes that are produced at exhibit "MT12"
were notes that I delivered to Ray Buck in the period immediately
following my leaving the flat. I wanted my money back. The
first note, the children's rhyme, was written by me but was
not delivered to any one.
It is nothing more than a jotting that I must have left at
the flat. I don't see how any one could seriously claim to
be threatened by it. I did not threaten Ray Buck with losing
his job: he failed to turn up. He has never repaid me the
money that he owes me.
17.
While it is fair to say that in the period immediately following
Michelle's confession and my leaving the flat, for maybe two
weeks, the four of us had rows, I have never made the threats
that Michelle Taylor claims and I have never conducted any
campaign of harassment by telephone or otherwise.
I was not responsible for Ray Buck losing his job at Velvet
Underground: indeed, as he concedes in his own Affidavit,
he volunteered to leave until his personal problems had been
sorted out.
18.
So far as the manuscript is concerned, it is correct that
very shortly after I left the flat I telephoned Hamish Hamilton
Ltd to ask for the return of the manuscript. I did not make
any threats as has been alleged. Unfortunately I understand
that Kate Jones is presently away from work undergoing chemotherapy
following an operation for cancer.
I am informed by my solicitor, Caroline Kean, and verily believe
that she has spoken to Andrew Franklin, who was a colleague
of Kate Jones' at the relevant time, and he has said that
he can recall nothing of the incidents alleged. In the event,
the manuscript was returned to me and I destroyed it by cutting
it up with scissors.
I was determined that the book would not be published because
it was entirely based on the fact that the Taylor sisters
were innocent, and I now knew that was not true. The pages
of the book were in plastic A4 covers: I cut them up with
scissors and binned them with all the photographs that it
contained. It is fair to say that I was very angry when I
cut the book up.
19.
I moved back in with my wife Debra in October 1993. I wanted
to forget all about the Taylor sisters. I really felt I had
been conned by them.
20.
I have read the Affidavit of Debra King concerning the harassment
that we suffered and the actions that we undertook to put
an end to it and confirm that to the best of my knowledge,
information and belief the contents of that Affidavit are
true. I have read the transcript of the telephone conversation
that is exhibited to Mark Stephens' Affidavit.
There is now produced and shown to me marked "POM10"
a transcript of the earlier telephone conversation that I
had with the Plaintiffs' mother. All I wanted was to put an
end to the harassment without the need to involve the police.
I wanted the person making the calls (who I was sure was Ray
Buck) to admit it to my face, explain why they were doing
it and to apologise.
If he had had the courage to have done that we would have
taken the matter no further. I have made no calls to either
of the Taylor sisters or any members of their family, nor
have I driven anywhere near their flat except as stated in
Debra's Affidavit. I had nothing to do with the car tyres
being stabbed as Michelle alleged. The first I heard of it
was when I read her Affidavit.
21.
As I state above, I gave a full statement to the police in
Summer 1994. In the light of what I knew, I was not prepared
to lie on the Taylor sisters' behalf. I did not, however,
reveal details of the confession to the police, although I
did tell Debra. This was only because I did not think there
was any point in doing so. I thought that they could not now
be prosecuted for the crime and I thought it would only cause
further suffering for the Shaughnessy family It is only as
a result of these proceedings that I have learned that Michelle
at least could still be prosecuted for perjury.
22.
So far as the News of the World story published on 28th May
is concerned, I repeat what I said in my original Affidavit.
I have also read the Affidavit sworn by Gary Jones and confirm
that so far as its contents relate to me, they are true. As
I state in paragraph 15 of my first Affidavit, I agreed in
May 1995 to let Gary Jones have the letters, which he had
read several months earlier, to verify the fact that I had
had an affair with Michelle Taylor which was reported in his
story.
I only agreed to this after I received Gary's assurances that
the letters would not be printed. I did not particularly want
publicity to be given to the fact I had had an affair with
Michelle Taylor. I am trying to put that behind me and re-build
my life with Debra.
It was only because Debra had been persuaded to tell the story
of the misery she had suffered as a result of the telephone
harassment she received that I agreed to let him have the
letters at all. I handed over to him a bag containing the
letters. They have since been returned to me and are now with
my solicitors, Olswang.
23.
I repeat what I said in my earlier Affidavit concerning the
documents and other materials referred to in the Schedule
to the Notice of Motion. I do not have the documents or tape
recordings that Michelle Taylor alleges. In August 1993 I
was living with the Taylor sisters at their flat. Ray Buck
could easily have had access to the tape recording that he
refers to, which was lying around in the flat with the other
papers relating to the appeal.
So far as I am aware I have never played him a tape recording
and I have no recollection of making the statement to him
concerning selling his story that is alleged. Several copies
of at least some of the papers were circulating: some had
been given to press and television journalists by the Taylor
family during the campaign and to Mrs Holmes.
24.
The tape recording referred to in paragraph 18 of my first
Affidavit was handed to the Plaintiffs solicitors on the evening
of 12th June 1993. I do not have, nor ever have had, any other
copies of it, except for one copy that was returned to Michelle
Taylor in 1993, nor do I have copies or originals of any of
the documents or other materials referred to in the schedule
of the Notice of Motion with the exception of the letters
referred to. It has been claimed that I told my solicitor
the tape was with Gary Jones.
Setting aside questions of privilege, I can confirm that that
is not correct. I had volunteered to my solicitors the existence
of the tape on Friday 10th June when I first met my solicitor
Caroline Kean and gave her instructions for preparation of
my first Affidavit. Reference to the tape and my willingness
to return it was included in my draft Affidavit. I was unable
to find the tape over the weekend, although I did not look
for it particularly thoroughly since I did not think there
was any urgency.
At Court on Monday 12th June I was asked to hand over the
tape forthwith. It was explained to me this meant as quickly
as possible. I speculated to my solicitor that the tape might
have been accidentally included in the bag of letters that
I gave to Gary Jones, which I had simply handed over without
opening, and had not been returned.
In the event I found the tape at my house later that day and
delivered it to Olswang. Although Gary Jones was aware of
the existence of the tape recording, he has never listened
to it and has never had a copy.
25.
For the sake of completeness, and because I have been specifically
asked whether I have at any time had any documents or other
materials referred to in the schedule to the Notice of Motion
or copies of them in my possession, power, custody or control,
I would add that, as previously stated in paragraph 12 of
my first Affidavit, and above, shortly after the Court of
Appeal hearing was over I was given free access to all the
papers and other documents returned by the Plaintiffs' solicitors.
Insofar as I then had those documents or other materials in
my possession, power, custody or control, I can confirm that
they were all left with the Plaintiffs, that I have no copies
of any of them and I have never passed any such documents
or material to the News of the World or any other newspaper
or to Mr Gary Jones.
26.
I have no intention of selling my story or any story to the
press or volunteering any information to the press at all.
All I wanted prior to these proceedings being issued was a
quiet life. I am now the subject matter of scurrilous stories
that are circulated by the Plaintiffs in this action. I refer
to the newspaper article exhibited to the Affidavit of Caroline
Mary Kean herein.
On Sunday 11th June I was "doorstepped" by a journalist
and a photographer who claimed they had been sent to my house
by the Taylor sisters' solicitor, Mark Stephens. The article
alleges that I am "a stalker" and reports the Taylor
sisters as saying that I have made their lives "hell".
The allegations reported in this story are untrue. I am advised
that they amount to a malicious falsehood. I am very concerned
that the Plaintiffs will continue to plant stories with the
press and to allege that I am harassing them when the reality
is that the reverse is true.
27.
Now that I am aware that Michelle Taylor could be prosecuted
for perjury, I want to be able to make a full report to the
authorities. I want to be able to defend myself from the Taylor
sisters' unwanted and scurrilous attacks and I want to be
able to speak out in public about the way we exploited the
Appeal system. |
| Contact : bernard.omahoney@bernardomahoney.com |
|
|
|
