Nwicker60
24-Aug-11, 08:55
"Cut me a deal and I'll talk"
ROBBERIES accused Matthew Peters told police investigators that he would, in effect, spill the beans about his alleged accomplice’s role if they cut him a deal, it was claimed in court yesterday.
The dramatic development was revealed by Constable Richard Ross who was involved in interviewing Peters at Leyland police station in Lancashire, on December 11, 2007, with D.S. Macdonald.
He told Wick Sheriff Court, that Peters didn’t say anything during the interview, which was taped, but that changed, once the machine was switched off.
Mr Ross said that Peters said:
* He would give him something that would “tie John Hind in with every job”.
* He would show the police the locations of the safes which had not been recovered.
* He said he had taught Hind everything he knew about safe breaking.
Hind (54 ) from Colne, in Lancashire, and Peters (40) from Bournemouth, are accused of a series of robberies at post offices and commercial premises in the Highlands and north-east of Scotland between July 27 and October 11, 2007 and stealing cash totalling £34,497 and stock amounting to £10,508.
Mr Ross, who was based in Caithness at the time, said that Peters asked what had been recovered from the Vauxhall Omega car by police at the scene of a break-in at Glenuig post office/shop in the south west of Inverness-shire and suggested they might have missed something.. Peters, said Mr Ross, also stated that the proceeds from the Embo raid had been £6,000, not £8000 and it had been “split 50-50”. The accused also mentioned that, when he had cut a cable at the post office, he didn’t realise it was and electricity cable.
Questioned, by senior fiscal depute, David Barclay, Mr Ross said that Peters’ comments were not noted at the time but were entered in D.S. Macdonald’s police notebook. Mr Ross said he had checked the notes and was satisfied it was an accurate record.
Using the notebook, Mr Ross took the court through the off-the record statements made by Peters who had been cautioned prior to making them.
The constable then said that the accused requested an assurance that no proceedings would be taken against him but was advised that no deals could be made with the police.
Mr Ross said: “Peters persistently asked for a deal which would involve no proceedings against him and Hind would get the blame.”
Constable Ross was pressed by Mathews’ defence advocate, Alan Macleod about why the accused’s post tape comments were not recorded.
Mr Macleod asked: “Why did you not switch the tape back on?”
Constable Ross replied: “I was not the leading officer in the interview.”
Mr Macleod: “There was not anything physically stopping you doing that.”
Constable Ross: “No.”
Mr Macleod said that video as well as sound recording facilities would have been available at the Leyland police station and would doubtless have been made available on request.
Mr Macleod: “I could stand here until I was blue in the face suggesting that Mr Peters did not say any of these things after the tape was switched and you would disagree and say he did. The accused did not say anything during the taped interview, despite being told that there was no deal and despite being reminded that he was under caution, he continued to say these things".
Mr Macleod claimed: "Mr Peters said none of these things. He would have to have been pretty stupid to have done so, after being repeatedly reminded there was no deal. “
Constable Ross said that the comments were not noted in D.S. Macdonald’s notebook until one or two hours later.
Mr Macleod questioned the comment alleged to have been made by Peters that he had cut a cable at the Embo post office, not realising it was a power line.
He continued: “That would have been a dangerous thing to have done. He could have been severely injured.””
Constable Ross: “That is a possibility.”
The trial, now in its third week, continues.
ROBBERIES accused Matthew Peters told police investigators that he would, in effect, spill the beans about his alleged accomplice’s role if they cut him a deal, it was claimed in court yesterday.
The dramatic development was revealed by Constable Richard Ross who was involved in interviewing Peters at Leyland police station in Lancashire, on December 11, 2007, with D.S. Macdonald.
He told Wick Sheriff Court, that Peters didn’t say anything during the interview, which was taped, but that changed, once the machine was switched off.
Mr Ross said that Peters said:
* He would give him something that would “tie John Hind in with every job”.
* He would show the police the locations of the safes which had not been recovered.
* He said he had taught Hind everything he knew about safe breaking.
Hind (54 ) from Colne, in Lancashire, and Peters (40) from Bournemouth, are accused of a series of robberies at post offices and commercial premises in the Highlands and north-east of Scotland between July 27 and October 11, 2007 and stealing cash totalling £34,497 and stock amounting to £10,508.
Mr Ross, who was based in Caithness at the time, said that Peters asked what had been recovered from the Vauxhall Omega car by police at the scene of a break-in at Glenuig post office/shop in the south west of Inverness-shire and suggested they might have missed something.. Peters, said Mr Ross, also stated that the proceeds from the Embo raid had been £6,000, not £8000 and it had been “split 50-50”. The accused also mentioned that, when he had cut a cable at the post office, he didn’t realise it was and electricity cable.
Questioned, by senior fiscal depute, David Barclay, Mr Ross said that Peters’ comments were not noted at the time but were entered in D.S. Macdonald’s police notebook. Mr Ross said he had checked the notes and was satisfied it was an accurate record.
Using the notebook, Mr Ross took the court through the off-the record statements made by Peters who had been cautioned prior to making them.
The constable then said that the accused requested an assurance that no proceedings would be taken against him but was advised that no deals could be made with the police.
Mr Ross said: “Peters persistently asked for a deal which would involve no proceedings against him and Hind would get the blame.”
Constable Ross was pressed by Mathews’ defence advocate, Alan Macleod about why the accused’s post tape comments were not recorded.
Mr Macleod asked: “Why did you not switch the tape back on?”
Constable Ross replied: “I was not the leading officer in the interview.”
Mr Macleod: “There was not anything physically stopping you doing that.”
Constable Ross: “No.”
Mr Macleod said that video as well as sound recording facilities would have been available at the Leyland police station and would doubtless have been made available on request.
Mr Macleod: “I could stand here until I was blue in the face suggesting that Mr Peters did not say any of these things after the tape was switched and you would disagree and say he did. The accused did not say anything during the taped interview, despite being told that there was no deal and despite being reminded that he was under caution, he continued to say these things".
Mr Macleod claimed: "Mr Peters said none of these things. He would have to have been pretty stupid to have done so, after being repeatedly reminded there was no deal. “
Constable Ross said that the comments were not noted in D.S. Macdonald’s notebook until one or two hours later.
Mr Macleod questioned the comment alleged to have been made by Peters that he had cut a cable at the Embo post office, not realising it was a power line.
He continued: “That would have been a dangerous thing to have done. He could have been severely injured.””
Constable Ross: “That is a possibility.”
The trial, now in its third week, continues.