Spot-fixing trial: Asif omitted details in police interview
Judge says bowler did not volunteer evidence.
Justice Cooke resumed his summing-up of the alleged spot-fixing trial and issued the jury an advisory for the time when they start considering the case of banned Pakistan cricketer Mohammad Asif in relation to his excuse for bowling a no-ball.
Salman Butt, another banned Pakistan player, and Asif are facing charges of conspiracy to cheat and conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments following the Lord’s Test in August last year, when they allegedly conspired with agent Mazhar Majeed, banned fast-bowler Mohammad Amir and other people unknown to bowl pre-planned no-balls. Butt and Asif deny the charges.
The jury can only give a verdict on events directly related to the no-balls.
The judge made his comment on the 16th day of the case before starting the full review of evidence that the court heard during the course of the trial. Cooke reminded the jury that Asif, in an initial police interview while he was under caution but not arrest, did not volunteer evidence that he gave under oath during proceedings at the Southwark Crown Court.
Asif had told the court that Butt had sworn at him before he bowled the no-ball. His lawyer also pointed out the pressure Butt put on Asif, which according to the then fast-bowler, caused him to overstep and deliver the no-ball. Asif also argued that police had not asked him for an excuse for the no-ball.
However, the judge explained to the jury on how the defendants were made aware that, “it may harm your defence if you do not mention something you later rely on in court…”. The jury was also told to consider if it was reasonable for Asif not to have mentioned the excuse earlier.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 27th, 2011.
Salman Butt, another banned Pakistan player, and Asif are facing charges of conspiracy to cheat and conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments following the Lord’s Test in August last year, when they allegedly conspired with agent Mazhar Majeed, banned fast-bowler Mohammad Amir and other people unknown to bowl pre-planned no-balls. Butt and Asif deny the charges.
The jury can only give a verdict on events directly related to the no-balls.
The judge made his comment on the 16th day of the case before starting the full review of evidence that the court heard during the course of the trial. Cooke reminded the jury that Asif, in an initial police interview while he was under caution but not arrest, did not volunteer evidence that he gave under oath during proceedings at the Southwark Crown Court.
Asif had told the court that Butt had sworn at him before he bowled the no-ball. His lawyer also pointed out the pressure Butt put on Asif, which according to the then fast-bowler, caused him to overstep and deliver the no-ball. Asif also argued that police had not asked him for an excuse for the no-ball.
However, the judge explained to the jury on how the defendants were made aware that, “it may harm your defence if you do not mention something you later rely on in court…”. The jury was also told to consider if it was reasonable for Asif not to have mentioned the excuse earlier.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 27th, 2011.