The case of Andrew Fitch-Holland, the co-accused in the Chris Cairns perjury trial, has been reduced to the status of a “sideshow”, according to his lawyer, Jonathan Laidlaw, QC
ESPNcricinfo staff18-Nov-2015The case of Andrew Fitch-Holland, the co-accused in the Chris Cairns perjury trial, has been reduced to the status of a “sideshow”, according to his lawyer, Jonathan Laidlaw, QC.Fitch-Holland denies perverting the course of justice, a charge he faces jointly with Cairns, after the pair allegedly attempted to secure a false witness statement from Lou Vincent, the disgraced former New Zealand batsman, in support of Cairns’ successful libel action against Lalit Modi in 2012.In the course of the six-week trial, Fitch-Holland has been characterised by the prosecution as a “star-struck” individual who had fallen so far under Cairns’ influence that he was willing to risk his career and reputation as a lawyer.However, Laidlaw argued that the prosecution had become so focused on securing a verdict against Cairns that they had allowed themselves to be taken in by the testimony of Vincent, a “deeply flawed individual” who “wouldn’t recognise the truth if it struck him square in the forehead.””The prosecution has become rather too Cairns-focused in this case,” said Laidlaw. “Have they overlooked that there is a second man on trial here?”The key evidence in the case against Fitch-Holland and Cairns, who also denies a second count of perjury, lies in a recorded Skype conversation between Fitch-Holland and Vincent, in which the defendant says: “Between you and I, we all know some of what is being said is clearly true”.Vincent, who was plainly uncomfortable in the course of the conversation, at one stage responds: “It’s a big ask from me to… in a legal document say something that isn’t true.”Well that’s right,” Fitch-Holland replies.Laidlaw dismissed the evidence as “the cursory, and unfair selection of six lines or so” and described the predicament of his client as being “the thing of nightmares for a practicing barrister”.”It can’t get much worse that to be accused of interfering with a system of justice you plainly respect,” Laidlaw said.Vincent, by contrast, had – in the QC’s estimation – “lied and lied and has literally escaped scot free”, having avoided either a jail sentence or a fine despite confirming last year that he had taken money to influence matches.”The word of a man who has committed umpteen criminal offences all over the world for which he has escaped with what? A ban, a life ban in cricket imposed at a time when he’d finished playing the game”, Laidlaw said. “If it weren’t so serious it would be laughable.”Throughout his testimony, Fitch-Holland maintained his belief that Cairns was innocent of match-fixing. Therefore, his lawyer added, if the jury believe that Cairns is not guilty then, by extension, the same ruling must apply to Fitch-Holland, because he cannot have contrived to cover up a crime that did not exist.The judge is expected to begin his summing-up of the case on Friday, with the jury likely to retire on Monday to consider its verdict.