Comments on the Witnesses
If you have read all or most of what has been published herein, then you can be forgiven if, along the way, you have become totally confused, lost in a sea of text etc’, and we would have to agree with you that it is not an easy case to follow. However, we have spent many months, pouring over the statements and the Appeal Transcript time and time again to be certain of getting our facts as correct as possible. We may have missed the odd point or two along the way, but on the whole we believe that we have covered the most important issue’s contained within. Please keep in mind also that we do not have access to all of the statements that were made. However, based on what we have in our possession we certainly do have enough to make a valid judgment. We have been in contact with Paul Pagintons new legal team at Leo Abse & Cohen, and spoken with Mr Andrew Shanahan, the solicitor handling the efforts to get this back before the Court. I have also spoken with Dr. Keith Borer, a highly respected forensic scientist & expert witness who was instructed for the trial in 1997.
Knowing where to begin is a nightmare, but I will try not to stray too much when putting across facts.
So, where do I begin? Well I suppose the beginning is as good as anywhere. I promise to keep it brief.
The Fatal Night
As we know from the statement, Paul had attended a sports presentation evening with his sister Cindy to see their brother Dean receive an award.
Afterwards, Paul went out to a night club, where, during his visit, he got into a scuffle and suffered a bloodied nose and a black eye. He then went to his sisters home at 8 Cormorant Way, Duffryn, Newport, where Cindy had gone.
He found Cindy and her boyfriend Matthew Thompson and Matthews other friend, Mark Pontin, upon his arrival. [Paul had been very close friends since Matthew was 8 years old.]
All were a little bit worse for drink.
An argument began when Matthew turned nasty toward Cindy [It is known that Matthew was aggressive and violent towards Cindy on numerous occasions] Paul then intervened in order to stop Matthew hurting Cindy. The fight started at this point. The rest is subject to interpretation.
********************************
The Police have their version of events. The original defence team have theirs, even though they are not necessarily the same as Paul’s and I will talk about some of them later, in particular Paul’s Barrister, John Charle’s Rees Q.C.
We have to keep in mind that Paul was in a distressed state when arrested and during the Police interviews. If you have ever been in turmoil then you will know exactly what I am getting at. The mind will not always function properly. Recollections can be vague and muddled [Remember, they had been drinking alcohol]. The shock & horror of what had taken place could put up a mental barrier as to exactly how events actually happened. Again, they can become muddled, seem vague and even blocked out through sheer trauma. Try to imagine yourself in this situation. Your life long friend has died whilst in a fight with you. Would you be able to recall everything? You have read the statements, so I have no need to go through them here and bore you to tears. So let’s go back to the night in question and in particular the witnesses. I will make reference only to sections of witness statements in order to keep our conclusions as brief as possible. What witnesses state, is in black and our comments are in Blue.
Melvyn Court – Tina Court – Mark Smith
Melvyn Court
Melvyn Court:- “ …The woman was shouting something about a knife and I think I heard:- “Don’t stab him”
Comment:- Mark Pontin (see his statement) who was present in the house, make’s no reference to this at all. Neither does anyone else. It is Courts word only and is unsubstantiated.
Melvyn Court:- “Paul was shouting” “ I’m going to stab you in the head”
Comment:- This clearly contradicts Paul’s actions prior to Mark Pontin leaving.
Paul had no intentions of maiming Matthew, as he was just trying to calm him down. Pontin state’s this in his 2nd statement.
Melvyn Court:- “Matthew had a bleeding nose and I think a cut on one of his eye’s.”
Comment:- Matthew did not have a bleeding nose or cut on the eye. Mark Smith clearly states in his statement that he did not see this.
Melvyn Court:- “Tina [Mrs Court] took Cindy into my home. Paul Paginton came in with me also” “Paul was still very wound up and aggressive”
Comment:- The fact that Paul accompanied Melvyn Court into his home, leaving Matthew at Cindy’s home [alive at this time] shows that Paul was calming down. If this is not so, then WHY did he leave in the first place? It shows a level of calming.
Melvyn Court:- “ Paul was really getting aggressive. . He had tensed his body up and he was clenching his fists up on his side.”
Comment:- Paul was unable to clench his fist due to the fact that he had cut his hand on the blade of the knife, whilst taking the knife off Cindy who had held it to Matthews throat. Hence the marks on Matthews neck.
Melvyn Court:- “I saw both of them [Paul & Cindy] knock on the front door”
Comment:- We ran a test and we have determined that Court could not have seen Paul & Cindy from where he says he was standing, absolutely impossible !
Melvyn Court:- “It was at this point that I heard a woman’s voice come from No.9 Cormorant Way. She was shouting for them to be quiet”
Comment:- If one refers to the statement of the lady in question, Joan Williams, you will see that this doesn’t fit !
Melvyn Court:- He says that Paul said “Matthew picked up something to hit me, so I picked up something to hit him. I hit him over the head.
Comment:- There was never any such comment or incident !
Melvyn Court:- “Paul was upset. He was crying and he walked into the kitchen”
Comment:- This is hardly the actions of a murderer? Paul is actually walking away from trouble. [Remember Courts comments above when you read the next selections from his statement.]
Melvyn Court:- Cindy jumped onto Matthew trying to give him mouth to mouth. I pulled her off and Paul shouted :-
“I’m sorry Bro”
Paul tried to pick Matthew up off the floor. He looked very upset. I told him to go into the kitchen, and he did with Cindy”
Comment:- [Now remember what I reminded you of in my last comment]
Given what Court has stated above, I have to ask this question:- How could Paul Paginton have possibly been in 2 places at the same time?
Melvyn Court:- “I shut the kitchen door leaving Paul Paginton, Tina my wife and Cindy in the kitchen”
Comment:- The kitchen door was never closed. It was open at all times.
Melvyn Court claims that he grabbed the knife from Paul and dragged Paul from off Matthew. He fails to say that he was there when Matthew was ramming Pauls head against the kitchen window, but according to Mark Pontin [statement further on] The knife incident happened 1st and then Matthew rammed Paul’s head through the kitchen window. He, Pontin, then left and saw the neighbour, Court, on his own doorstep. This seems more valid a statement than that of Melvyn Courts and is consistent with what Paul told the Police. I am of the opinion that Melvyn Courts memory of events are a mixture of some fact and some “flights of fancy”.
Tina Court
Tina Court:- “….there was a knock on my door. Cindy came to the door and there was a man there who Cindy said was Paul, her brother”
Comment:- Cindy arrived alone !
*********************************************** Mark Smith
Mark Smith:- “Paul said aggressively with fists clenched:-“If he touches you again I don’t give a fuck, I’ll do fifteen years” “He repeated practically the same words at various time’s in the conversation on about three occasions.
Comment:- Nobody backs this statement up. Nobody else heard Paul say this, yet others were around him at that time. It seems incredulous that nobody else remembers this being said?
Mark Smith:- “I went back to No.7 and telephoned the ambulance service from my mothers house”
Comment:- Tina Court, in her statement, says it was SHE who telephoned the ambulance & police.
There are so many inconsistencies in the statement of Mark Smith that I have decided to list just a few of them above as it would take up too much time to read. I invite you, if you already haven’t, to read his statement and that of the others to see for yourself.
***************************************
Mark Pontin
Mark Pontins statement is inconsistent in some places, but he retracts and amends some of this in a 2nd statement. Please compare his statements for yourselves. He said that Cindy rang him at about 1:00am in the morning. However, checks with the taxi company that took Cindy home revealed that the driver did not pick her up until gone 1:00am. Pontin’s statement confirms several things. It confirms that Paul took the knife from Cindy and also that she, Cindy, had held it to Matthews neck. He then says that Cindy put the knife on the worktop when told to put it away by Paul. Pontin also seems to confirm that Matthew was the aggressor when he says that Matthew grabbed Paul. He also shows that Paul was trying to calm the situation from the beginning. When Paul held Matthew on the floor, Paul was heard to say “just calm down Matt, give it a rest” but it was Matthew who initiated the violence once again by grabbing Paul in a head lock and banged Pauls head against a kitchen window 3 times. The 3rd time it broke. It would seem that there was certainly a lot of provocation on Matthews part and restraint on the part of Paul. Hardly the act of a murderer?
**************************************************