 |
 |
|
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: Yes, sorry, I am trying at the moment almost to try and not exactly help
you but try and narrow the issue.
MR. TANSEY: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: If you agree that those inferences are reasonable ones, there is evidence
that he was going to hand over information to a Russian who was a friend of Viktor’s. Supposing
that is the case, your point is that there is then a gap in the chain, because a friend of Viktor’s does
not necessarily mean a friend of Viktor Oschenko -- it could be Viktor whatever common surname
there may be in Eastern Europe.
MR. TANSEY: My Lord, yes.
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: Is that the way you are putting it? Are you saying ----
MR. TANSEY: My Lord ----
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: Are you going further than that?
MR. TANSEY: I am saying that, as it stands at present, the only evidence so far as the
documentation is concerned is in fact that it was in the car, the boot of the car. Whether it was to be
handed over is a matter in issue but certainly it was in the boot of the car.
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: I follow that it is all in issue. I am simply saying: being in the boot of the
car; going to the very ’phone box that was mentioned in the telephone call, albeit a little later than he
was instructed to -- I am simply saying it would seem to me open to a jury properly directed to
draw the inference that he was going to hand over documents in due course, at the behest of the
friend of Viktor’s.
MR. TANSEY: Your Lordship is aware that there is no reference to documents of any kind in the
telephone call; it is purely an urgent message.
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: I entirely appreciate that, but then we have got the evidence of
tradecraft which seems to indicate that, during that summer, something was happening. It is certainly
open to the jury to take that view, so I would not have thought that you would get very far if you
said those inferences were not capable of being drawn by the jury. But where I am more concerned
is whether in fact, if that is the case, Viktor in the telephone call is sufficiently linked with Viktor
Oschenko.
MR. TANSEY: That is the concern. That is the significant part of the prosecution case. That is how
they put it and, my Lord, the submission is how can they reasonably say that? How can they say it is
Viktor Oschenko? They have not called him; they have no documents; there are no sightings.
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: No evidence -- there is no evidence at the moment before the jury that
Mr. Smith and Mr. Oschenko ever were in each other’s company.
MR. TANSEY: That is right.
MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD: I know you put the question and there was a slight delay about a
misunderstanding, but it came out clearly that there are no photographs of them.
 |