Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
IN THE SOUTHWARK CROWN COURT
Between:
R
v
CHRIS CAIRNS
[13.6.1970]
&
ANDREW FITCH HOLLAND
[7.1.1965]
OPENING NOTE
INTRODUCTION.
1. The first defendant, Chris Cairns is a retired professional cricketer
who played international test and one-day cricket for New Zealand for
17 years. He had a glittering career, winning 62 test caps and 215 caps
for one-day internationals. He captained the New Zealand cricket
team on seven occasions. He last played international cricket on the
8th January 2006.
2. Mr Cairns is described by his fellow cricketers as a hero and role
model; a legend. He was the golden boy in the cricket world whom
every cricketer wanted to emulate.
2
3. The second defendant, Andrew Fitch-Holland is a barrister and friend
of Mr Cairns.
4. When Chris Cairns retired from international cricket, he joined the
Chandigarh Lions in the Indian Cricket League. The Indian Cricket
League was a private cricket league where games were played in the
Twenty 20 format. Essentially what this means is that the game is
shortened by reducing the number of balls bowled to make it a more
exciting match. The Indian Cricket League was not supported by the
Board of Control for Cricket in India or the International Cricket
Council.
5. On the 27th of October 2008, Chris Cairns was suspended from the
Indian Cricket League. The public reason given for his suspension was
underperforming due to an ankle injury which put him in breach of
contract.
6. At the time and in the weeks and months that followed it was rumored
that Chris Cairns and others were involved in match fixing in the
Indian Cricket League.
7. Fifteen months after Chris Cairns’ suspension, on the 5th January 2010,
the Chairman and Commissioner of the Indian Premier League, Lalit
Modi posted this message on his twitter page: “Chris Cairns removed
from the IPL auction list due to his past record of match fixing. This was
done by the Governing body today”. Mr Modi also made a statement to a
journalist for the online cricket magazine, ESPN Cric-info UK, saying:
“We have removed Chris Cairns from the list for alleged allegations [sic]
3
as we have zero tolerance for this kind of stuff. The governing council
has decided against keeping him on the list.”
8. On the 22nd January 2010, Chris Cairns brought a libel action against
Mr Modi in the High Court in the UK. He said that Mr Modi’s words
were understood to mean that he was guilty of match fixing.
9. Mr Modi’s defence to the libel action was one of justification. That is
to say, that the words said about Chris Cairns were true.
10. Mr Cairns made a number of statements in advance of the High Court
hearing. He also gave evidence on oath. Mr Cairns repeatedly said in
statements and confirmed on oath before the court that he had never
cheated at cricket. This was untrue. The prosecution can demonstrate
that Mr Cairns had been involved in cheating at cricket, or match
fixing for some time. When he denied it, he was lying to the court. He
committed perjury.
11. The libel case took place at the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand
before Mr Justice Bean sitting without a jury. The case was heard in
the first half on March 2012. Mr Justice Bean did not hear from many
of the witnesses who will give evidence in this case. As a result of the
limited evidence that was available to the High Court, Mr Justice Bean
found in Mr Cairns’ favour and Mr Modi was ordered to pay £1.4
million in damages and costs.
12. It is important to stress at this stage that Mr Cairns is not being
prosecuted in this case for manipulating a cricket game. He is being
prosecuted for something far more serious: for manipulating the
justice system in this county.
4
13. You will hear evidence during this trial that match fixing was taking
place in the Indian Cricket League and involved players other than
Chris Cairns.
14. The police in the UK have not involved themselves with match fixing
that has taken place overseas. That has been left to the cricketing
regulatory body to deal with. [Duthie p 188]. However, bringing a libel
case in the UK courts which is known to be false; and trying to
persuade witnesses to lie in a UK court is a different matter.
15. That is what these two defendants have done.
16. The prosecution case against Mr Cairns is that he manipulated the
legal system in this county to his advantage.
17. Chris Cairns knew that he had been guilty of match fixing, he knew
that he had been suspended and he knew that what Mr Modi had
tweeted about him was true.
18. But Mr Cairns was an arrogant individual and very sure of the power
he held over the people around him. When he brought his libel action
in the High Court, he would have felt very confident that there would
only be little if any evidence saying he was guilty of match-fixing.
After all, the only people who knew for certain that Mr Cairns was
engaged in match fixing were those people who had been match-fixing
with him. Why would they want to give evidence to that effect in
court?
19. So Mr Cairns had a free rein: he could protest his good name and
spotless reputation to the rooftops, knowing or believing that he was
untouchable.
5
20. That is what Chris Cairns did: he lied in his witness statements, he lied
on oath and he arranged that others should give false evidence on his
behalf.
21. This brings me to the second defendant, Andrew Fitch-Holland. Mr
Fitch-Holland is a qualified barrister and long-standing friend of Chris
Cairns. [x 394-6] One witness described Mr Fitch-Holland as a “cricket
groupie.” [Hitchcock]
22. Chris Cairns’ legal team for the High Court action did not include
Andrew Fitch-Holland. Counsel who acted for Mr Cairns were Andrew
Caldecott QC and Ian Helme [xp 91]. Those lawyers were bound by
their professional code of conduct requiring them to act honestly and
not to mislead the court. They could advise that a witness provided a
statement but could not possibly ask witnesses to provide false
evidence.
23. That is where Mr Fitch-Holland came in.
24. Mr Fitch-Holland posted on his website: “Lead advisor to former NZ
captain Chris Cairns in his libel action against Lalit Modi. After the first
contested High Court Twitter trial, Cairns was awarded damages and
costs in excess of £1.4 million.” [x 338]
25. The “lead advice” provided by Mr Fitch-Holland was something no
respectable lawyer would provide: it involved trying to persuade a
witness to lie during the High Court case in order to support Mr
Cairns’ perjured/false evidence.
26. The witness in question who was approached by Mr Fitch-Holland will
give evidence in this case. His name is Lou Vincent. Mr Vincent was a
6
cricketer who played with the Chandigarh Lions at the time when Mr
Cairns was their captain in 2008. Mr Vincent not only knew that Mr
Cairns had fixed matches but Mr Vincent was involved in the match
fixing himself under the direct orders of Mr Cairns.
27. In March 2011, when Mr Cairns was preparing his libel case, he
contacted Mr Vincent and asked him to “write a letter for him to his
lawyers who were doing the case with Lalit Modi about how [Lou
Vincent] played in the ICL and [Lou Vincent] didn’t see any wrongdoings
there. He wanted [Lou Vincent] to give a statement that basically said
that there was no ‘fixing’, and more towards Chris, that he wasn’t
involved in any form of match-fixing in the ICL” [Vincent 65-6].
28. Both Mr Cairns and Mr Vincent knew that any such statement in the
terms requested would have been untrue. Mr Vincent (no doubt
worried about the seriousness of committing perjury) refused to
provide the statement.
29. Following this refusal, on the 23rd March 2011, Mr Fitch-Holland,
acting in the capacity of “lead advisor” to Mr Cairns, contacted Mr
Vincent using Skype. The purpose of the contact was to put pressure
on Mr Vincent. This can only have been done at Mr Cairns’ request. Mr
Vincent knew that Mr Fitch-Holland was a close friend of Mr Cairns
and must have had a good idea of what was going to be said. Mr
Vincent took the precaution of recording the Skype call.
30. You will hear the call itself: [see transcript]
a. “AFH: …between you and I we all know some of what is being
said is clearly true” [xp 4]
7
b. “AFH: …at the end of the day just because you give a statement
no one can force you to come to court, no one can force you to do
anything, you know” [xp 5]
c. “AFH: ..what they are saying is you were one of the eleven people
on the field in those games and from where you were standing
everything seemed okay full stop.
LV: that's obviously it's not you know because I it wasn't
AFH: well yeah so
LV: it's a big ask from me to sort of like you say in a legal
document to say something that isn't true
AFH: well that's right, well then again
LV: when I have not seen any um anything for what's happened
AFH: benefit yeah
LV: yeah you know what I mean now I'm not only am I
indefinitely waiting for a return on that involvement ah now I
have been legally asked to sort of be involved and from my
position
AFH: yeah
LV: it's like I feel like I'm being used again” [xp 5]
d. “LV: it's a horrible situation because I also want to be there for a
mate as well and Cairnsy has been a mate although you know
like I have said I am not proud of what has happened at all what
has happened has been something that I've I don't think I am it's
hard for me to live with what's gone on
8
AFH: I think the reality is that Harry will give a brief statement I
think Darryl will give a brief statement it's a question of who
does it first and I think unfortunately you are all looking at each
other and saying well I am not going to do it at the end of the day
someone is going to have to step up they really are cause I
otherwise it is just going to be, it's just not going to look good
LV: yea
AFH: I don't think this is ever going to go to court and if it does I
guess we put your statement in the shredder and you don't
appear as a witness end of um it's like a game of chicken I don't
want to blink before that fucker does, I know they'll settle.
LV: yeah, yeah
AFH: and Christopher he is not an idiot he's not going to stand,
he's not going to go to court and run the risk of standing up on
the witness stand and be made to look like fool and it all being all
over the papers so you know he won't run that risk he will back
down before then.” [xp 9]
31. Play the call.
32. The Skype conversation between Andrew Fitch-Holland and Lou
Vincent provides the clearest evidence that:
a. That Andrew Fitch-Holland knew that what Mr Modi was saying
was “clearly true”.
b. That Mr Vincent was saying the same thing: everything was “not
okay” and it was a “big ask” to “say something that was not true” in
a legal document.
9
c. That Chris Cairns was lying when he said everything on the field
was ok.
d. What all of this recognised was that Chris Cairns was indeed guilty
of match fixing.
e. That by denying it in sworn witness statements and on oath in
court, Mr Cairns was committing perjury.
f. That Mr Fitch-Holland was working in concert with Mr Cairns to
get a witness to lie in court to support his bogus libel claim. Both
Chris Cairns and Andrew Fitch-Holland, by inducing Lou Vincent to
give false evidence, were attempting to pervert the course of
justice.
33. See indictment.
EVIDENCE OF MATCH FIXING
34. Although Chris Cairns is not being prosecuted for cheating at cricket,
you will have to be sure that he did cheat before deciding whether he
is guilty of the charges that he does face.
35. The prosecution will present clear evidence that Mr Cairns was
repeatedly involved in match fixing from the time he joined the Indian
Cricket League. This evidence comes in the following forms:
a. That from 2008, Mr Cairns was openly boasting that match fixing
did not matter at the Indian Cricket League as it was not an ICC
event and that no one could ever prove it. [Adams]
10
b. That fellow players and umpires involve in matches with the
Chandigarh Lions in the Indian Cricket League saw Mr Cairns do
things on the cricket pitch, which “did not look right.” [Bond]
c. That Mr Cairns targeted players whom he hoped would help him
fix matches. You will hear from two such players. The first is
Brendon McCullum who is the current captain of the New
Zealand cricket team. Mr McCullum refused to have anything to do
with the proposal made by Mr Cairns. The second player that was
approached by Mr Cairns was corrupted by him and involved
himself in several games where he deliberately underperformed at
Mr Cairns’ request. That second person was Lou Vincent. It was
Lou Vincent whom Mr Fitch-Holland tried to persuade to lie in
court to support Chris Cairns.
CRICKET.
36. Cricket, for those who do not follow this sport, is a game played by
two teams of eleven players each. The game is played on a large
circular or oval field in the middle of which is a 22 yard long pitch
which had three sticks at each end called “stumps” each of which have
two small pieces of wood balanced on top called “bales”. Two
batsmen, one at each end of the pitch, take it in turns to face the
bowler who tries to hit the stumps and knock the bales off or to tempt
the batsman into hitting the ball in such as way that it can be caught in
the air by the fielding team. The bowlers bowl balls in sets of 6 balls,
known as ‘overs’. Balls hit particularly hard by the batsman can fly to
11
the edge of the field without touching the ground and these hits score
6 runs, if they go over the boundary. If the ball in these circumstances
reaches the boundary but runs along the ground they score 4 runs.
Balls struck by a batsman which are unlikely to reach the boundary
allow the batsmen to run back and forth between the stumps to gain
runs one at a time. If the fielders can reach the ball and throw it back
quickly enough to catch the batsmen running in between the stumps,
the bails can be knocked off and the player will be out. Another
12
the higher the odds against this happening and thus the greater the
winnings if such an event occurred.
39. If a player is corrupt he can manipulate such an outcome and win
large sums of money for himself and others either acting on his own or
more easily acting together with other corrupt players.
40. In legitimate gambling, the outcome is unknown or random. You can
make educated guesses. The more likely an outcome, the smaller the
odds and the less money you will win. The more specific a bet, the less
certain it is and the more you will win.
41. Where match fixing comes in is that, rather than leave these bets to
chance, the players in the game ensure the outcome. They fix the
outcome. So if you know that a bet is placed on the first batsman
being bowled out; or the second batsman scoring no more than five
runs, as a dishonest cricket player, you can make sure these things
happen.
42. There are many ways of match fixing: some involve spread betting,
some involve spot fixing: all involve betting huge amounts of money
on the outcome of at least some part of the game. All are attempts to
defraud bookmakers by a player or players taking a pre-arranged
action to fix the result of a match. All undermine the game itself.
43. What makes it match fixing as opposed to a lucky bet, it the
involvement of the player in determining the result.
44. Because it is harder to win that to lose, it is easier to fix a match by
underscoring rather than over scoring. The cricketer involved in
match fixing might not have the glory of a victorious game, but they
13
and those they work with can make a great deal of money on placing a
successful bet on the result which they themselves can determine.
CAIRNS MATCH FIXING
45. Chris Cairns was responsible for orchestrating match fixing games
involving the Chandigarh Lions. However, logic will tell you that in a
game involving 11 team members it is hard to fix a match
singlehandedly. If the aim is that your team only scores a limited
number of runs, you need the help of other players to make sure that
they under perform.
46. One of the dangers of match fixing is that your conduct on the field
may give you away. If you play to lose, rather than play to win,
spectators, umpires or honest players may wonder what on earth is
going on.
47. You will hear evidence in this case from umpires for the Indian Cricket
League tournament in 2008 who were suspicious of the behaviour of
certain players, specifically Chris Cairns. [Allan Jones p 224 and David
Brandon p226]
48. You will hear about specific matches in this case where innocent
parties, (those not involved in match fixing), found what was going on
during a game as most peculiar. We can cross-refer the observations
of the legitimate people with those who knew about the match fixing
to support the overall suggestion that what Mr Cairns was doing
during those games was fundamentally dishonest.
14
49. To use an example, you will hear about a match played on the 15th
April 2008 when Mr Cairns arranged that the match should be fixed.
Chris Cairns arranged to fix that match. He asked Lou Vincent (the
man on the Skype call) to help him. Additionally, you will hear from
legitimate people who were at the match who saw that something was
not quite right about the game.
CHRIS HARRIS and SHANE BOND
50. Chris Harris is a witness who will give evidence in this case. He was a
professional cricketer who played for a team called the Hyderabad
Heroes in the Indian Cricket League tournaments in 2007 and 2008 in
which Chris Cairns captained the Chandigarh Lions.
51. Mr Harris remembered two specific games which he thought were
peculiar. The first of those was a match played on the 15th April 2008.
He remembered Chris Cairns scoring really low (when he was
batting). At one stage, Mr Cairns hit a ball so as offered a simple catch
which was dropped by the other team. Mr Cairns then went for what
Mr Harris called “a silly run” and was run out. Mr Harris found this
very suspicious.
52. Mr Harris will also give evidence about a match that took place on the
13th October 2008 between the Chandigarh Lions and the Mumbai
Champs. Mr Cairns was the Captain on the Chandigarh Lions. The
Champs were batting first and one of the opening batsmen just kept
blocking the ball. He did not appear to want to score any runs. When
the Chandigarh Lions came to bat, they did not score well either. It
15
looked as if they were going to lose. It seemed that both sides were
deliberately trying to under perform.
53. However, everything changed when the Chandigarh wicketkeeper
came to bat. He clearly was not part of the objective to under-perform
and he tried to do what any honest player would do: to score some
runs. As a result of this player’s enthusiasm, the game changed
entirely and the Chandigarh Lions ended up winning having come
from a hopeless position.
54. In those circumstances, you would imagine that the captain of the
wining team would be happy. Not so with Mr Cairns. Mr Harris will
tell you that Mr Cairns was not very pleased at all.
SHANE BOND
55. Shane Bond was a cricketer who was playing for a team called the
Delhi Giants in the Indian Cricket league in 2008 when Chris Cairns
was the Captain of the Chandigarh Lions. Mr Bond also remembers the
match of the 13th of October 2008 and Mr Cairns’ lack of enthusiasm
then his team won.
56. What possible reason could there be for players deliberately trying to
lose a game other than the fact that bets had been placed on their
losing? This explains why Mr Cairns was so disappointed when the
wicketkeeper (who must have been honest) came to bat and actually
played the game properly.
57. So the first reason we say that you can be sure that match-fixing was
going on was because certain games were played in a suspicious way.
16
What we will look at next is the evidence of people whom Mr Cairns
tried to recruit to match fix on his behalf.
BRENDAN McCULLUM
58. Brendon McCullum is a professional cricketer who in 2008 was
playing in the Indian Cricket League for a team called the Kolkata
Knight Riders. Mr McCullum will be a witness in this case and will tell
you that Chris Cairns was one of his idols: someone he looked up to
and aspired to emulate. When Mr McCullum started to play cricket
professionally, it was Mr Cairns who was helpful and protective
towards him. The two men became friends.
59. When Mr McCullum was in Kolkata in 2008, Chris Cairns asked to
meet. The meeting took place in Mr Cairns hotel room at the Sonar
Hotel. Mr Cairns steered the conversation to the subject of spread
betting. Mr McCullum said he did not really understand how this
worked and Mr Cairns took out a piece of paper and explained the
process. Mr Cairns told Mr McCullum that everyone was doing it and
he didn’t want Mr McCullum to miss out. Mr Cairns told Mr McCullum
that he had a group of people working for him in the Indian Cricket
League. It was clear to Mr McCullum that Mr Cairns wanted Mr
McCullum to work for him.
60. Mr Cairns explained how he would be able to get Mr McCullum
between $70,000 to $180,000 per game. He also explained how he
was able to get the money back to New Zealand without people asking
17
questions. He said he had a man in Dubai who was an associate. He
bought property in Dubai, held it for a few years and then sold it. The
money then appeared clean.
61. Mr McCullum said he found it difficult to say no to Mr Cairns’ proposal
then and there, as Mr Cairns had been such an idol of his and he was
shocked at this proposal. Mr Cairns later telephoned Mr McCullum and
it was at that sage that Mr McCullum said he did not want to get
involved in the scheme.
62. When Mr McCullum returned to the UK, Mr Cairns asked to meet him
and the two met up in a café in Worcester. The two men were spotted
together by a cricketing fan [McCabe] who recognised them both. The
fan was able to provide a date for the meeting: the 11th June 2008
because New Zealand were playing Worcestershire in Worcester that
day. At the meeting, Mr Cairns asked Mr McCullum if he had changed
his mind. Mr McCullum said he had not.
63. Mr McCullum did not lodge an official report against Mr Cairns and his
dishonest proposal at the time. He ought to have done so. He will tell
you that he regrets that but explains it on the basis that Mr Cairns was
a hero of his.
64. However, Mr McCullum was sufficiently troubled by the proposal that
he did mention the approach to several people informally.
a. Whilst he was in India, Mr McCullum was represented by an agent
called Leanne McGoldrick. She represented a number of
cricketers. In July or August 2008, Ms McGoldrick remembered Mr
McCullum and his wife coming to her house for dinner. It was
18
during that evening while Ms McGoldrick’s husband was out of the
room that Mr McCullum asked her whether she thought that
anyone in the New Zealand cricket team could be involved in
match fixing. She said she did not. He then went on to ask her if
she thought Chris Cairns would be involved in match fixing or spot
fixing. She said she did not. Mr McCullum then went on to tell Ms
McGoldrick about the approach that had been made to him by
Chris Cairns. He said it had taken place a few weeks earlier in a
café or bar (she was not sure which). Ms McGoldrick asked Mr
McCullum if he had reported this approach and he said he had told
Daniel Vettori.
b. Daniel Vettori will give evidence in this case. He is a professional
cricketer. He will tell you about a discussion he had with Brendon
McCullum during which Mr McCullum said that he had been
approached by Chris Cairns to spot fix matches.
c. In late 2008, Mr McCullum met up with Shane Bond. Mr
McCullum told Mr Bond that he had been approached by Chris
Cairns in the UK and Mr Cairns wanted him to become involved in
match fixing. This ties in with the meeting that Mr McCullum said
took place in the café in Worcester on the 11th June 2008.
d. In late 2008 or early 2009, Kyle Mills remembers Mr McCullum
telling him that Chris Cairns had approached him about match
fixing.
e. Ricky Ponting, a former professional cricketer remembered a
conversation he had with Mr McCullum in a hotel room in 2008.
19
They were both team mates for the Kolkata Knight Riders at the
time. Mr McCullum received a telephone call which did not last
very long. When the call was concluded Mr McCullum said that it
was Chris Cairns and that he was making a business proposal. Of
itself this evidence is not conclusive but it dovetails with Mr
McCullum’s account.
f. It was not until February 2011 that Brendon McCullum made an
official report of Chris Cairns dishonest approach. It was during
the Cricket World Cup being held in India. An anti corruption
educational package was presented to the New Zealand cricket
team and their support staff by John Rhodes of the Anti
Corruption and Security Unit. The ACSU is a body charged with
enforcing a zero tolerance police toward cricket corruption
worldwide. On the 17th February 2011, following the anti
corruption educational package, Brendon McCullum made a
statement to the ACSU about Chris Cairns.
65. A word of warning about the witnesses whom Mr McCullum told
about Mr Cairns’ approach to match fix. They do not provide
independent evidence of Mr Cairns’ dishonest schemes. However,
their evidence is important, because it demonstrates that this is
something that Mr McCullum complained of a long time ago, pretty
near to the time of the approach itself. This is not something that Mr
McCullum has been made up recently out of spite. It was something
that genuinely concerned him.
20
66. Mr Cairns will say in his defence that Mr McCullum is lying. There was
no approach and there was no match fixing.
67. You will consider that defence with care. You will ask yourself why a
man like Brendon McCullum, who hero-worshipped Mr Cairns would
invent such a lie? You will ask yourself why Mr McCullum told people
of the approach at the time only and made no official complaint about
it? You will ask yourself why Mr McCullum would raise his head above
the parapet to become involved in a case, where he knows he is likely
to face challenge and to be discredited by Mr Cairns? Unless he was
telling the truth.
68. During the time that Mr Cairns was trying to corrupt Mr McCullum, Mr
Cairns told him about other players who were match fixing for him.
Two of the people named were Daryl Tuffey and Lou Vincent. See
Skype transcript.
LOU VINCENT
69. Whereas Brendon McCullum had the strength of character to resist
Chris Cairns proposals to become involved in match fixing, the same
had not been true of Lou Vincent.
70. Lou Vincent was a professional cricketer until he retired in 2013. At
the end of 2007, he was dropped from the New Zealand team and felt
that he had been badly treated. He became depressed and started
abusing cannabis and alcohol. His wife at the time, Eleanor, was a UK
national. She was supportive of Mr Vincent and it was agreed that
they would start a new life together in the UK.
21
71. In early 2008, Mr Vincent signed up to play with the Chandigarh Lions,
the team captained by Chris Cairns.
72. In around March 2008, Mr Vincent was in India and was approached
by an Indian male about what he described as a “sponsorship deal”.
The reality was that this was a proposal of match fixing. Mr Vincent
was offered money and the services of a prostitute. He refused both.
73. Mr Vincent immediately told his agent, Leanne McGoldrick about the
approach and she advised him that she would report the approach to a
senior official in the Indian Cricket League. Mr Vincent then decided
he ought to tell the captain, Chris Cairns.
74. As with Brendon McCullum, Lou Vincent looked up to and trusted
Chris Cairns. Mr Vincent told Mr Cairns that he had reported the
approach to the Indian Cricket League executive. Mr Cairns said that
he had done the right thing. Mr Cairns then went on to say that
reporting the approach would provide “good cover” and that Mr
Vincent was now working for him.
75. Mr Cairns told Mr Vincent that the Indian Cricket League was corrupt
anyway and they both deserved to get a piece of the pie. He said that
he would be paid $50,000 for each match that he fixed.
76. Mr Vincent told Mr Cairns about his mental health issues (being
depressed) and was worried that he felt sometimes that he could
hardly hold a bat. Mr Cairns response was that this would provide a
pretext for the fixing as it meant he was “guaranteed to under-
perform.”
22
77. Mr Vincent was never told the exact figure of runs he should achieve,
only that it would be around 10 to 15 runs off 20 balls and then to get
out.
78. Mr Vincent was told that there were four players in the team involved
in fixing: himself, Chris Cairns, Daryl Tuffey and a fourth man called
Dinesh Mongia. This information supports what Mr McCullum was
told by Mr Cairns.
79. Mr Cairns was openly discussing match fixing with Mr Vincent.
80. Mr Vincent remembered four games in which he underperformed on
Chris Cairns instructions. He interspersed these “fixed” games with
games where he played properly to avoid suspicion. The fixed games
were:
a. 25th March 2008: Chandigarh Lions v Mumbai Champs
b. 29th March 2008: Chandigarh Lions v Hyderabad Heroes
c. 26th March 2008: Chandigarh Lions v Kolkata Tigers
d. 15th April 2008: ICL India v ICL world team. That was the game
that the witness Chris Harris found peculiar.
81. During that last game, Mr Vincent’s fixing skills failed him and he
remained on the pitch until he was stumped for 28 runs from 27 balls.
Mr Cairns was not happy. Mr Cairns told Mr Vincent after the game
that he had cost him millions. He threatened to hit Mr Vincent at one
stage.
82. In April 2008, Mr Cairns treated his “fixers” to a holiday in Dubai
together with another team member who was not involved. Mr
23
Vincent got the impression that Mr Cairns was working for someone
in Dubai.
ANDRE ADAMS
83. Sometime between June and August 2008, Mr Vincent approached
another cricketer, Andre Adams, who was a close friend of his. Mr
Adams said that Mr Vincent put forward a proposal to make some
money by way of match fixing. Mr Adams was not remotely interested.
However, Mr Vincent had told him that Mr Adams knew that Mr
Vincent suffered from depression and was not going to report him
knowing that his metal state was fragile.
84. Mr Adams remembered the time at which Chris Cairns left the
tournament. There was an occasion when all of the New Zealand team
were having dinner. Chris Cairns was there. The conversation got
round to match fixing. Mr Cairns said: “It doesn’t matter here [at the
ILC] as it is not an ILCC event and the tournament is not even
sanctioned.” He added: “How will they ever prove it?”
85. That remark gives an indication of the confidence that Chis Cairns felt
that no one would dare speak out against him.
DISCLOSURES BY LOU VINCENT
86. In 2008, Lou Vincent told his wife, Eleanor, all about the match fixing.
She will be a witness in the case. She is estranged for Mr Vincent now
and her name is Eleanor Riley.
24
87. Eleanor Riley is able to give an interesting insight into the way Lou
Vincent was functioning in 2008. She described how he was in awe of
Mr Cairns.
88. Ms Riley was told by Mr Vincent about the first approach involving the
cash and the prostitute. Two weeks later, she received a telephone call
from Mr Vincent during which he was in tears. He told her that he had
just lost Chris Cairns $250,000 because he had done something wrong.
89. We can pin point this game as the one on the 15th April 2008.
90. Mr Vincent told his wife about the match fixing. Chris Cairns was the
ringleader. Chris Cairns would want Lou to underperform and score
low. Mr Cairns said that Lou Vincent was perfect for the job because
he was an unpredictable player. Players who always played well and
then underperformed were busted straight away. Being
unpredictable, if he scored low then no one else would be suspicious.
91. Lou Vincent’s wife was aware from talking to her husband that there
were signals given when a match was to be fixed: one such signal
would involve a player tapping his hat.
92. Mr Vincent told his wife that Chris Cairns had told the young players
in the team that if they did not do what he asked, they would never
play cricket again. These were young Indian players who were
desperate to play cricket and just followed Mr Cairns’ instructions.
93. Mr Vincent told his wife that Mr Cairns was going to pay him $50,000
per game. But he was never paid this after the last game. Mr Vincent
was angry about the money owed to him and in June 2008, he and his
25
wife flew to Dubai to see Chris Cairns. When money was discussed,
Mr Cairns said he did not have the money.
94. [Cross refer to Skype call].
95. I warned you about how to approach witnesses who provide second
hand information. So far, what Eleanor Riley has said was second hand
as it comes from Lou Vincent.
96. However, Eleanor Riley met Chris Cairns and had first hand
conversations with him on the subject of match fixing.
97. During the summer of 2008, Lou and Eleanor Vincent were at home in
Hale in Lancashire. Mr Cairns and his girlfriend turned up and the
four of them went out for dinner to a restaurant called the Manhattan
Grill in Altrincham together with anther cricketer, Freddie Flintoff.
Freddie Flintoff spent time just drinking. The conversation amongst
the other four turned to match fixing.
98. Chris Cairns was talking to Eleanor Riley about match fixing and
telling her not to worry about it. Eleanor said how concerned she was.
Mr Cairns said that because it had taken place in India, they were not
going to get caught. He kept telling her that they were safe.
99. Mr Cairns girlfriend was there and she was fully participating in the
match fixing conversation. Both she and Mr Cairns were reassuring
Eleanor that everything would be all right because everyone was
doing it.
100. As well as telling his wife about Chris Cairns, Lou Vincent also told told
other people. In late 2009, Mr Vincent told another cricketer, Phill
Hayes about match fixing. He said that it was going on all the time and
26
that Chris Cairns was the ring leader. Mr Vincent told Mr Hayes about
one incident in a match when he was meant to get out and tried to get
caught but scored a six. Mr Cairns had been really angry and
threatened him with a bat.
101. In August 2011, Lou Vincent spoke to Steven Pearson who was a club
cricket player and went to stay with Lou Vincent. Mr Vincent told him
all about his involvement in math fixing and how it started. Mr Vincent
told Mr Pearson that he would take direction from Mr Cairns
POST 2008
102. After Chris Cairns was suspended from the ICL in 2008, he stopped
telling Mr Vincent what to do.
103. Unfortunately for Mr Vincent, word was out in the match fixing
community that he would involve himself in underscoring and he
received many approaches from others who saw the game of cricket
as a dishonest scheme to make money. Lou Vincent had gone over to
the dark place. It was now almost impossible for him to go straight.
104. It was not until 2013 that Mr Vincent was able to come clean and
confess to officials the extent of his wrong doing.
THE LIBEL CASE: CHRONOLGY
105. On 21 January 2010 Chris Cairns issued proceedings against Lalit
Modi in the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice. He
27
claimed general and aggravated damages for libel and an injunction
restraining Lalit Modi from any further publication [xp 281-288].
106. The claim was amended on 5 April 2011 and on 21 December 2011.
The solicitor who signed the amended pleadings was Rhory
Robertson, a partner in Collyer Bristow LLP [xp 289-309].
107. Chris Cairns himself made three witness statements, all of which
concluded with the recital: “I believe that the facts stated in this witness
statement are true”. The statements are all signed by him and dated:
a. 11 October 2010;
b. 18 May 2011; and
c. 1 March 2012.
108. In his first statement Chris Cairns stated: “I have never, ever cheated at
cricket. Nor would I ever contemplate such a thing.” The statement
appears under a heading “The truth” [x 331]. At paragraph 21 the
statement continued: “what is alleged against me is utter rubbish and
deeply hurtful” [x 337]. At paragraph 30, Mr Cairns reiterated his
position: “I will not stand by and let the Defendant persist in the lie that
I am a cheat” [x 339].
109. In his second statement, Chris Cairns repeated his assertions that he
was not a cheat. He stated at paragraph 13, again under the heading
“The truth”: “I have never, ever cheated at cricket. Nor would I ever
contemplate such a thing” [x 346].
110. Chris Cairns’ third statement is prefaced by these words: “Before
dealing with specific matter which are raised I reiterate that I have
28
never cheated and cricket and would never contemplate such a thing” [x
379].
111. Chris Cairns gave evidence on oath in the libel case at the Royal Courts
of Justice on 5 and 6 March 2012 [x 92]. Relevant passages are as
follows:
a. He confirmed that the facts stated in the witness statements were
true and that he did not wish to amend or qualify anything in them
save the timing of the meeting at which his contract with the IPL
was terminated [x 92-93];
b. He stated that he was not dismissed for suspected match-fixing [x
150, 157, 173-4];
c. He stated: “I have never cheated” [x 156];
d. Further, “I am not a cheat….I am not a cheat” [x 192], “I am not a
cheat and I continue to say that” [x 209 and also at x 216.]
e. He stated that he had not instructed any batsman to underperform
[x 217-219].
112. The evidence given by Chris Cairns included some detail as to the
nature of his relationship with Andrew Fitch-Holland. He explained
that:
a. Andrew Fitch-Holland would give him advice as to contracts with
which he was presented;
b. Andrew Fitch-Holland gave him advice about how to deal with the
way he had been treated by the Indian Cricket League; and
29
c. When rumours began to circulate that he was a match-fixer, after
he had left the International Cricket League, he called Andrew
Fitch-Holland and asked him to “shut them down”.
113. In support of his bogus claim for libel, the following witnesses gave
evidence in support of Mr Cairns: Mrs Cairns; Andrew Fitch-Holland;
Darryl Tuffey. Despite being pressurised to do so, Mr Vincent neither
provided a witness statement nor gave evidence.
114. In August 2013 Lou Vincent voluntarily approached the New Zealand
Cricket Players Association and told them that he had been involved in
various incidences of match fixing during the past few years. In
interviews he gave to the International Cricket Council, Mr Vincent
gave details of his own involvement in match fixing including the fact
that he had been recruited into fixing by Chris Cairns during the
Indian Cricket League and that he had underperformed at Mr Cairns
request on a number of occasions during 2008. In his disclosures to
the International Cricket Council, Lou Vincent also described being
contacted by Andrew Fitch-Holland. Lou Vincent understood that Mr
Fitch-Holland was a barrister in the UK who was assisting Mr Cairns in
preparing for the High Court case. Mr Vincent said that Mr Fitch-
Holland tried to persuade him, Mr Vincent, to provide evidence
supporting Mr Cairns’ case that he had never match-fixed. Since he felt
that he was being asked to lie in a legal document he recorded the
conversation, which took place using Skype.
ARRESTS AND INTERVIEWS
30
115. On the 26th March 2014, Andrew Fitch-Holland was arrested at his
home address at Duddenhoe End Farm, Saffron Waldon in Essex. He
made no reply to the caution.
116. On the same day, Police in New Zealand in conjunction with the UK
police approached Chris Cairns in Auckland in New Zealand.
117. Both defendants were interviewed in the presence of their respective
solicitor.
CHRIS CAIRNS
118. On 1st April 2014, Chris Cairns was interviewed in the presence of a
solicitor under caution but not under arrest. He provided a full
account detailing:
a. His life, both personal and professional in 2008 including his exit
from the Indian Cricket League;
b. The rationale behind launching the libel action;
c. His assertion that the evidence he gave was entirely accurate and
was given of his own free will and with a full understanding of the
implications should he give false testimony.
d. His friendship with Andrew Fitch-Holland, who he described as a
cricket-obsessed friend who had given him advice about contracts
and legal issues.
e. His relationship with Lou Vincent, who he described as a colleague
with whom he has had little contact since the Indian Cricket
League and who he thought had some issues with depression and
drink.
31
f. His agreement that he had contacted Lou Vincent and asked him to
give a statement in support of his case at the High Court but that
Lou had implied that he wanted money in order to do so.
g. His agreement that he may have asked Andrew Fitch-Holland to
contact some people he wanted to give statements for him but he
wasn’t sure who and it would have been just to put some context
on what they were trying to achieve not to put any pressure.
119. He stated that Lou Vincent’s evidence was completely false. He had
never instructed Lou, or anyone else, to underperform in the Indian
Cricket League and the incident following the match on 15th April
2008 in the UK did not happen. [p 1-210]
120. On 26th May 2014, Chris Cairns was interviewed for a second time.
Again he gave a full account.
a. He agreed that there may have been an occasion where he met
Brendon McCullum in India and they may have discussed match
fixing or spread betting in general terms but he denied making any
approach to Brendon or telling him that he was involved in this in
the Indian Cricket League.
b. He stated that he may have been involved in arranging the Skype
call but denied that he would have asked Andrew Fitch-Holland to
put pressure on or hassle Lou Vincent to give a statement.
c. He considered passages of the evidence he gave in the High Court
where he stated he was not a cheat and would not instruct a
batsman to underperform and he stated that he stood by the fact
32
that this was genuine evidence and accepted that he had brought
the case on the basis that he was not a cheat. [p 211-262]
ANDREW FITCH-HOLLAND
121. On 26th March 2014, Andrew Fitch-Holland was interviewed in the
presence of a solicitor under caution following his arrest. He answered
no comment to all questions except to confirm that the voices that can
be heard on the Skype call are his and Lou Vincent’s. [p 263-278]
122. However, he indicated that if he was allowed full disclosure of the
entire Skype call or transcript then he would answer questions. He
was provided with a copy of the recording a week before he returned
on bail on 14th May 2014.
123. On 14th May 2014 Andrew Fitch-Holland was interviewed in the
presence of a solicitor under caution. He provided the following
account:
a. He had known Chris Cairns since 2006 and considered him a good
friend.
b. He had not formally represented Chris Cairns as a lawyer but
sometimes acted as a kind of agent for him.
c. Following the libel trial he had been annoyed with Chris Cairns as
he had been promised some payment if it was successful but none
had been forthcoming.
d. He described Chris Cairns as having been under some financial
pressures since splitting from his previous wife, Carin, in 2008.
33
e. He agreed that he had himself given a statement in the proceedings
and that he was well aware of the implications should there be
anything in the statement that he knew to be false.
f. He explained many of the passages of the Skype call set out above
as relating to the fact that the Indian players in the Indian Cricket
League had admitted some corruption as was laid out in Modi’s
defence.
g. He also stated that in general he wasn’t really listening to what Lou
Vincent was saying but more talking over him.
h. In response to the part where he said: “I don’t think it will go to
court and if it does then I guess we put your statement in the
shredder and you don’t appear as a witness” what he had meant
was that no-one could force him to go to court and that the
reference to the shredder was a literal one in the sense that
unused statements would get shredded eventually.
i. In relation to his statement that: “Christopher is not an idiot and
isn’t going to run the risk of standing up and being made to look a
fool” he said that he had always believed it would damage Chris
Cairns’ reputation to be subject to a full trial and cross
examination and that he had raised this with Chris Cairns.
j. He said that neither Chris Cairns nor Lou Vincent had ever
revealed themselves as cheats to him. [p 279-319]
124. On 25th September 2014 both defendants were charged.
34
125. In answer to charge, Andrew Fitch-Holland provided a prepared
statement in which he denied the charge and expressed his
disappointment at the decision.
126. CONCLUSION
127. BURDEN AND STANDARD OF PROOF
October 6th 2015