Page 464 - FINAL MASTER 616pp 20-6-19 SOUND

9. It was only years later - days before the court case - that you conveniently remembered your audio clip (which we have expert professional evidence to show was “doctored”). You never said at the relevant time – ie when you were exposed back in August 2014 - that you were doing extra work at Mrs Hillgarth’s behest. And this despite the evidence of five leaseholders repeatedly protesting the lack of information. Those emails were always dismissed rudely and with contradictory information.
Isn’t this simply subjective? We have two reports evidencing it was not “doctored” and I think you’re pushing the boat out a bit saying Johnny Arthur is an expert professional – he’s a ruddy DJ most of the time? He didn’t identify any music. He mistook paper turning on Mrs Hillgarth’s note pad on her lap for editing clicks? He didn’t even quote her “well then everybody will be happy” correctly. Mrs Hillgarth actually never denied saying “well then everybody will be happy” – suggest you re- visit your email to me outlining what her concerns were? Music, unknown male voice, no knowledge of any conversation/agreement?
Re: And this despite the evidence of five leaseholders repeatedly protesting the lack of information. Those emails were always dismissed rudely and with contradictory information.
See what I mean, gossip and innuendo. Let me have copies from these five protesting lack of information and when? During the works, within the six months of the published accounts or more than likely on prompting from Mrs H months if not years after the works?
Show me and I can respond to “rudely” [most likely] and “contradictory information” [very doubtful]
10. When further pressed by the leaseholders as to what was going on, you subsequently claimed to have been carrying out the work that you did under the supervision of A&R Lawrence. In effect that you were a sub-contractor of A&R Lawrence, and that your work was all part of their contract. This was plainly untrue and was dismissed as nonsense by Mr White in his Witness Statement. We also have an e-mail from Mr Isaacs on 2 April 2015 confirming that he was only engaged in relation to the work actually carried out by A&R Lawrence (ie not in relation to any work carried out by you, for which he accepted no responsibility).
Seeing as Mrs Hillgarth is on record as having written Mr White’s Witness Statement [and his second one once I pointed out some ludicrous errors] I’m not too sure how much credence we can give to Mr White especially with his subsequent email to me saying he’d be quite happy to authenticate the work I did, but please pay the outstanding £1500 odd?