|
Page 52D transcript reads:
‘He said and agreed that if copying is well done it is impossible to tell
whether a tape is an original or a copy. He said in no circumstances could
he detect any edits.’
Judge said on recording
(1 min 12 sec):
‘He said and indeed all of the others agreed that if copying is well done it
is impossible to tell whether a tape was an original or a copy. He said in
those circumstances he could not detect any edits.’
Page 53B transcript reads:
‘Tape fourteen there was overlap distortion during the music ...’
Judge said on recording
(3 min 24 sec):
‘Tape fourteen there was overload distortion during the music ...’
Page 53C transcript reads:
‘… they are each the same length and they have got the same words, there’s
no criticism made of tape fourteen (inaudible). He spoke …’
Judge said on recording
(3 min 51 sec):
‘… they are each the same length and they have got the same words [judge
laughs], there’s no criticism made of tape fourteen. Very often the police
officers gabbled, but where they say exactly the same thing, exactly the
same thing. He spoke …’
Page 53D transcript reads:
‘… he said it would be foolish to switch it on early if you wanted to record
a meeting lasting longer than that. That’s commonsense.’
Judge said on recording
(4 min 23 sec):
‘… he said it would be foolish to switch it on if you wanted to record a
meeting lasting longer than that. That at the end was commonsense.’
Page 53E transcript reads:
‘… what Mr Taylor did say is a tape is as reliable as the honesty of the
people who produce it, if they are reliable so is the tape. So we come back
to the evidence, the reliability of the evidence of Mr Lloyd and Mr Mounter,
supported by Mr Hawkey.’
Judge said on recording
(4 min 55 sec):
‘… what Mr Taylor did say is that tape is as reliable as the honesty of the
people who produce it, if they are reliable so is the evidence. So we come
back to the reliability of Mr Lloyd and Mr Mounter, supported by Mr Hawkey.’
Page 53H transcript reads:
‘ “I don’t suggest the words we heard on the tape had been tampered with or
doctored”.’
Judge said on recording
(5 min 41 sec):
‘ “I did not suggest that the words we hear on the tapes were not uttered”.’
Page 54C transcript reads:
‘… experts who give evidence in Court are normally people who have an open
mind and give their opinions, professional opinion.’
Judge said on recording
(6 min 49 sec):
‘… experts who give evidence in Court are normally people who have an open
mind and give their honest, professional opinion.’
Page 54D transcript reads:
‘That’s a matter for you to consider. Mr Ford approached the matter …’
Judge said on recording
(7 min 19 sec):
‘That’s an impression which you may care to ponder. At all events Mr Ford
approached the matter …’
Page 54E transcript reads:
‘… Mr Ford spoke of thirty Hz hum … thirty Hz tone bursts on tape one …’
Judge said on recording
(7 min 56 sec):
‘… Mr Ford spoke of thirty Hz tone bursts on tape one …’
Page 54E transcript reads:
‘He said thirty Hz tone bursts he had come across before.’
Judge said on recording
(8 min 12 sec):
‘He said thirty Hz tone bursts he’d never met before.’
Page 54F transcript reads:
‘He said there were no tone bursts on the two sets of copy tapes and they
are unique.’
Judge said on recording
(8 min 37 sec):
‘He said there were no tone bursts on the two sets of copy tapes and they
are unique to tapes 2F tape 1 in this case.’
Page 55A transcript reads:
‘He said fifty Hz hum is a common problem with telephone pick up. But he
said in addition to the hum you might expect there is a noise which turns
the noise into a cyclic hum and that is what he found unusual.’
Judge said on recording
(9 min 11 sec):
‘He said fifty Hz hum is common with a telephone pick up. But you’ll
remember that tape five was stationed in the telephone pick up, that he says
in addition to the hum you might expect there is a blasting hum that turns
the whole noise into what he called a cyclic hum, and that he found very
unusual.’
Page 55B transcript reads:
‘… referred to by other witnesses involved as an indicating mark.’
Judge said on recording
(10 min 15 sec):
‘… referred to by other witnesses, and that was rather to what he refers as
an indicating mark.’
Page 55F transcript reads:
‘He found tone bursts on tape fourteen which he said should not have been
present.’
Judge said on recording
(11 min 39 sec):
‘He found fifty Hz hum on tape thirteen which he said shouldn’t have been
present.’
Page 56G transcript reads:
‘Nothing to criticise about tape fourteen, he didn’t investigate tape
fifteen in detail.’
Judge said on recording
(15 min 36 sec):
‘Nothing to criticise about tape fourteen. Tapes thirteen, fourteen and
fifteen he said were identical in length. He didn’t investigate tape fifteen
in detail.’
Page 56H transcript reads:
‘… so he said any fabricating must have been done before the ‘Times’ copied
them, before December.’
Judge said on recording
(15 min 57 sec):
‘… and so he said the only fabricating it must have been done before the
‘Times’ copy was made of that recording in evidence.’
Page 57A transcript reads:
‘… he said it verged more than on suspicion for copying.’
Judge said on recording
(16 min 22 sec):
‘… he said it supported grounds for suspicion of copying, and you will
remember that he spoke with some authority of hum as well. He spoke of the
meeting on that particular date as between the two. That is on tape one. The
marks on the tapes he said are a complete mystery, the purpose of the marks
is not clear.’
Page 57D transcript reads:
‘… those who actually made them, it’s their evidence rather than the
evidence on the boxes and spools …’
Judge said on recording
(18 min 00 sec):
‘… and that those who’ve actually played them, because they heard the tapes
as you’ve heard it. That identifies them rather than the evidence on the
boxes not spools ….’
Page 57F transcript reads:
‘He said no marks on tape two, no fifty Hz tone bursts …’
Judge said on recording
(19 min 15 sec):
‘No marks on tape two, no thirty Hz tone bursts …’
Page 57H transcript reads:
‘… after the speech interview. He said it was slowing up because of the
battery running down.’
Judge said on recording
(19 min 36 sec):
‘… after the speech interview. Originally, he said 3A, that’s the so to
speak off of the recording on that tape. It was longer than it now is. It
was slowing up because of the battery running down.’
Page 58C transcript reads:
‘So far as tape thirteen was concerned you will remember that it was
canvassed …’
Judge said on recording
(21 min 21 sec):
‘So far as tape thirteen was concerned you will remember that theory which
was canvassed …’
Page 58D transcript reads:
‘They don’t actually appear to have done an experiment at that place which
is put forward I think by…’
Judge said on recording
(21 min 21 sec):
‘They don’t actually appear to have done an experiment at that place; it is
put forward as a theory I think by…’
Page 58E transcript reads:
‘It is put forward as no more than a (inaudible) as that could have been
where it got on there.’
Judge said on recording
(22 min 7 sec):
‘It is put forward as a theory, really as no more than theory, is that the
way in which it could have got on there?’
Page 58H transcript reads:
‘… he said I have never suggested the people who created those tapes were
responsible for anything of that nature.’
Judge said on recording
(23 min 8 sec):
‘… I have never suggested he said that the people who created these tapes
were responsible for what happened.’
Page 59D transcript reads:
‘Because if anybody has fabricated those tapes he said he has fabricated
three tapes and the more tapes in existence the more risk there becomes of
being detected.’
Judge said on recording
(24 min 44 sec):
‘Because if anybody has fabricated tapes he has created two or three tapes,
the more tapes in existence the more difficult it becomes, well that’s
obvious isn’t it. It could take him a devil of a time to do it.’
Page 60A transcript reads:
‘… and found no evidence to suggest the tapes were edited or the
conversations tampered with in any way, that is true as a whole. Other
doubts arose from not the conversations but the parts of the tapes other
than the conversations.’
Judge said on recording
(26 min 56 sec):
‘… and found no evidence to suggest that the conversations were edited or
tampered with in any way. Well, that of course is, true of the others as
well. Their doubts arose not from the conversations but from the other parts
of these tapes.’
Page 60C transcript reads:
‘Now that is important evidence isn’t it, given by an expert in speech.’
Judge said on recording
(27 min 27 sec):
‘Well that’s an important piece of evidence isn’t it, written by someone
expert not just in tapes but in speech? We certainly found out subsequently
it would virtually impossible to make substantial changes to the text.’
Page 61B transcript reads:
‘… they said they had slowed that down, ran it through in the reverse and
(inaudible). What was happening was tape thirteen …’
Judge said on recording
(31 min 36 sec):
‘… well he said they had slowed that down, run it in reverse and concluded
from it that what was happening was was that was made, that was er tape
thirteen …’
Page 61C transcript reads:
‘… that turned out on analysis not to be so. The reason is thirteen and
fourteen are of the same length and it would not have been possible to get
the one off the turn-table in order for them to play that while the other
was going.’
Judge said on recording
(31 min 52 sec):
‘… that turned out on investigation not to be so. The reason was that those
two tapes thirteen and fourteen are of the same length and it wouldn’t have
been possible to get them off the, get the one off the turn-table in order
to have time to play it back while the other’s still going. Have you got
that?’
Page 61E transcript reads:
‘… the little Grundig one.’
Judge said on recording
(32 min 47 sec):
‘… the little Grundig one. Which if you remember was in stocktaking, that’s
it there. ’
Page 63B transcript reads:
‘We will now hear tape one please.’
Judge said on recording
(37 min 59 sec):
‘It’s clear to us now, and whether that’s in connection with what the
defendant put. It’s for you to decide. Can we now have the tape watch
please.’
|
