Nwicker60
28-Sep-11, 19:08
Trio walked away laughing and joking after torching car, accused alleges at Wick trial
A COURT heard today that a fire which destroyed one car and damaged another was started deliberately.
Two men Brett Webster (16) of Harrow Terrace, Wick, and Andrew Beresford (18) formerly of Seaforth Avenue, Wick, but now living in Golspie,, admit a charge of fire-raising. They implicated a third accused, Rachel Jones (19) who has pleaded not guilty.
Christopher Hendry of Wellington Street, Wick said he was awakened by his mother in the early hours of March 4, shouting –“Your car’s on fire”.
He told Wick Sheriff Court: “I could see the reflection of the flames as I entered the bathroom window which looks onto the garden compound at the rear of the house where the vehicles are parked.”
Mr Hendry said when he went outside, his £6,500 car was “up in flames” and was subsequently declared a write-off, and his father’s £12,000, Ford Focus was alight down the passenger’s side. It was removed from the parking compound, before firemen arrived.
Questioned by senior fiscal depute, David Barclay, Mr Hendry said that he had been in a relationship with Rachel Jones “a good while” before the incident.
Mr Hendry told Jones’ solicitor that he had been warned that Beresford was going to do damage to his car, but said he did not see anyone at the scene of the fire, and had taken the threat “with a pinch of salt”.
Police constable David Mackenzie who carried out inquiries at the scene, said that encountered, Jones and Beresford there, and asked them why they were in the area.
He told Sheriff Andrew Berry: “They said they had seen smoke and wondered what it was.”
The court was told that Jones lied in her initial interview with Sgt Steve MacDonald but in a second session admitted having been involved. She said that Andrew and Brett had left her house in Roxburgh Road, Wick on the night in question and returned with diesel which they said they were going to put on “Chrissie’ (Christopher Hendry’s) car.
Then the three of them made their way to the Hendry home. Beresford and Webster, said Jones couldn’t get over the wall and remained on it. She said she was never in the garden.
Jones told the police that she thought it was Beresford who poured the diesel onto the Seat Leon and stated that she didn’t think their actions were a good idea. Beresford and Webster tried unsuccessful ly to ignite the diesel with a lighter, but when that that didn’t work, Beresford took off one of his socks and it was doused in diesel and held under one of the wheels. Then all three walked away.
Questioned by Sgt MacDonald she said that it had been “stupid” to have gone with Webster and Beresford and added: “I didn’t actually think they would do it.”
Sgt MacDonald told Jones that she knew, that her two co-accussed had diesel and knew what they were going to do, and must have appreciated that it was “a very, very stupid thing to do”, to burn down a car next to a house, was “absolutely insane”.
Jones replied: “I know.”
However, in his evidence, Webster had a different version of Jones’ involvement. Asked first about why the fire-raising had been carried out, he said that Beresford “felt a bit in love” with Jones and resented the way that Christopher Henry had treated her when they were an item.
Webster said that Beresford, Jones and himself had they had all discussed what they were going to do. Webster said that Jones wanted to “get this done” and all three went down the Hendry house.
Following the difficulty in getting the diesel to light, they looked around for something to ignite. Webster said that Jones climbed down from the wall to help in the search, but in the end, the sock was used.
Webster said that when they all got back to Jones’ house she was “over the moon” about what they had done and told Beresford: “I love you, I love you, I love you...thank-you, thank-you, thank-you” but had accused him and Webster of “wanting to chicken out”.
Webster said that Jones’ lighter had been used to start the fire.
Cross-examined by Mr Burn, Webster agreed that Jones had not been involved in the execution of the crime but that they had all agreed to carry it out and added: “Rachel said we didn’t have the guts to do it”.
Webster added: “We didn’t do to prove her point.”
Mr Barclay said: “In the course of the planning was she giving you any encouragement?”
Webster: “Nearly all the way through...she was saying we were going to chicken out and was encouraging afterwards, saying she was grateful.”
Andrew Beresford said that he and Jones carried the can of diesel to the Hendrys’ garden.
He said that after they had had been there, all three of them walked up the road, “laughing, joking and giggling.”
Mr Barclay: “Was that because it was a job well done?”
Webster: “Possibly”.
Mr Barclay: “Are you fond of Rachel?”
Webster: “Yes”.
Mr Barclay: “Were you someone who would have done anything she asked you to do”
Webster: “Yes”.
Mr Barclay: “Would you have done so, if she asked you to set fire to Mr Hendry’s car?”
Webster: “At one point.”
The prosecution closed its case and Mr Burn will reveal tomorrow if he is to lead evidence.
A COURT heard today that a fire which destroyed one car and damaged another was started deliberately.
Two men Brett Webster (16) of Harrow Terrace, Wick, and Andrew Beresford (18) formerly of Seaforth Avenue, Wick, but now living in Golspie,, admit a charge of fire-raising. They implicated a third accused, Rachel Jones (19) who has pleaded not guilty.
Christopher Hendry of Wellington Street, Wick said he was awakened by his mother in the early hours of March 4, shouting –“Your car’s on fire”.
He told Wick Sheriff Court: “I could see the reflection of the flames as I entered the bathroom window which looks onto the garden compound at the rear of the house where the vehicles are parked.”
Mr Hendry said when he went outside, his £6,500 car was “up in flames” and was subsequently declared a write-off, and his father’s £12,000, Ford Focus was alight down the passenger’s side. It was removed from the parking compound, before firemen arrived.
Questioned by senior fiscal depute, David Barclay, Mr Hendry said that he had been in a relationship with Rachel Jones “a good while” before the incident.
Mr Hendry told Jones’ solicitor that he had been warned that Beresford was going to do damage to his car, but said he did not see anyone at the scene of the fire, and had taken the threat “with a pinch of salt”.
Police constable David Mackenzie who carried out inquiries at the scene, said that encountered, Jones and Beresford there, and asked them why they were in the area.
He told Sheriff Andrew Berry: “They said they had seen smoke and wondered what it was.”
The court was told that Jones lied in her initial interview with Sgt Steve MacDonald but in a second session admitted having been involved. She said that Andrew and Brett had left her house in Roxburgh Road, Wick on the night in question and returned with diesel which they said they were going to put on “Chrissie’ (Christopher Hendry’s) car.
Then the three of them made their way to the Hendry home. Beresford and Webster, said Jones couldn’t get over the wall and remained on it. She said she was never in the garden.
Jones told the police that she thought it was Beresford who poured the diesel onto the Seat Leon and stated that she didn’t think their actions were a good idea. Beresford and Webster tried unsuccessful ly to ignite the diesel with a lighter, but when that that didn’t work, Beresford took off one of his socks and it was doused in diesel and held under one of the wheels. Then all three walked away.
Questioned by Sgt MacDonald she said that it had been “stupid” to have gone with Webster and Beresford and added: “I didn’t actually think they would do it.”
Sgt MacDonald told Jones that she knew, that her two co-accussed had diesel and knew what they were going to do, and must have appreciated that it was “a very, very stupid thing to do”, to burn down a car next to a house, was “absolutely insane”.
Jones replied: “I know.”
However, in his evidence, Webster had a different version of Jones’ involvement. Asked first about why the fire-raising had been carried out, he said that Beresford “felt a bit in love” with Jones and resented the way that Christopher Henry had treated her when they were an item.
Webster said that Beresford, Jones and himself had they had all discussed what they were going to do. Webster said that Jones wanted to “get this done” and all three went down the Hendry house.
Following the difficulty in getting the diesel to light, they looked around for something to ignite. Webster said that Jones climbed down from the wall to help in the search, but in the end, the sock was used.
Webster said that when they all got back to Jones’ house she was “over the moon” about what they had done and told Beresford: “I love you, I love you, I love you...thank-you, thank-you, thank-you” but had accused him and Webster of “wanting to chicken out”.
Webster said that Jones’ lighter had been used to start the fire.
Cross-examined by Mr Burn, Webster agreed that Jones had not been involved in the execution of the crime but that they had all agreed to carry it out and added: “Rachel said we didn’t have the guts to do it”.
Webster added: “We didn’t do to prove her point.”
Mr Barclay said: “In the course of the planning was she giving you any encouragement?”
Webster: “Nearly all the way through...she was saying we were going to chicken out and was encouraging afterwards, saying she was grateful.”
Andrew Beresford said that he and Jones carried the can of diesel to the Hendrys’ garden.
He said that after they had had been there, all three of them walked up the road, “laughing, joking and giggling.”
Mr Barclay: “Was that because it was a job well done?”
Webster: “Possibly”.
Mr Barclay: “Are you fond of Rachel?”
Webster: “Yes”.
Mr Barclay: “Were you someone who would have done anything she asked you to do”
Webster: “Yes”.
Mr Barclay: “Would you have done so, if she asked you to set fire to Mr Hendry’s car?”
Webster: “At one point.”
The prosecution closed its case and Mr Burn will reveal tomorrow if he is to lead evidence.