Essex Boys, The New Generation (25 page)

Alvin’s boasting and bravado in prison was short-lived. Essex police, despite the late hour, were still actively seeking out evidence to convince him that it would be in his best interest to tell them his version of events. Alvin’s choice was simple: risk sitting out a trial for murder and hope that the jury don’t convict you, or confirm the police theory about Boshell’s murder and blame Ricky Percival.

13

  THE BEST LIE  

The best lie is always the one closest to the truth

-DS Carter talking to Damon Alvin,

16 April 2003, Gravesend

On 2 September 2005, just ten
days before Alvin’s trial was due to begin, DC Sharp was dispatched to take a more detailed statement from Gordon Osborne. The police wanted to cement their theory that the telephone call made at 11.48 p.m. from the payphone to Alvin’s girlfriend was relevant to Osborne’s recollection of hearing a gunshot or, as he later described, gunshots between 11 p.m. and 11.30 p.m. Police believed that Alvin could have murdered Boshell around 11.30 p.m. and then made his way to the telephone box, which was described as being a stone’s throw away, to ring his partner Clair for a lift home. Osborne’s timings, if correct, combined with the time of the call to Clair, certainly suggested that this might have been the case.

Since the murder, Osborne had left the UK for Spain, where he had started up his own civil engineering business. When DC Sharp arrived in Spain and spoke to Osborne, he explained that he had emigrated because he was ‘fed up of life in England’. He said he was never going to return because he was settled where he was. In any event, he said, the weather was far better in Spain than Essex.

DC Sharp noted that during their conversation Osborne appeared relaxed and spoke freely about his business, his plans for the property he was living in and the quality of life that he was enjoying. The mood changed, however, when DC Sharp explained that the contact numbers Osborne had given to the police were no longer in use and the address he had provided was false.

‘Locating your whereabouts,’ DC Sharp said, ‘has not been easy.’

Osborne explained that he was not trying to avoid the police; he had merely lost his phone and he had only recently become aware of his actual address.

It seems almost incredible that a person does not know his or her home address, but Osborne’s explanation was accepted without further comment. DC Sharp asked Osborne if he would be willing to attend court and give evidence about the gunshots that he claims to have heard. Osborne was emphatic when he said no, and he assured DC Sharp that he would never change his mind because he feared reprisals from those who had been charged in connection with the murder.

Disheartened but refusing to concede defeat, DC Sharp asked Osborne to make another statement, which he would submit to the prosecution in the hope it could be read out at the trial in his absence. He felt that if the judge was made aware that Osborne feared for his safety, then this method of hearing his testimony could be ruled as acceptable. Osborne agreed and, despite its being four and a half years since the night Boshell died, he managed to recall even more detail than in his previous statements.

‘Dealing first with the house-to-house inquiry form,’ he said, ‘I recall the details I gave were recorded by a detective who called at my door. I will admit that at the time I didn’t really think about the answers I gave to the officer and I was quite vague about what I said. However, by the time an officer called to take a full statement from me I had given it more thought. In this statement, I said that I went to bed about nine o’clock on the night in question. This was probably earlier than the usual time I go, but I’d had a hard day at work. My bedroom was at the rear of the house. I would always have one of the bedroom windows open; the curtains would also have been open because they were never closed. Occasionally I would read in bed, sometimes I would just drift off to sleep. On the night in question, I can’t recall what I did or how long I was awake before I went to sleep.

‘I woke up about eleven o’clock that same evening. I’d heard two or three shots coming from the allotment. I can’t be more specific about the time now, but I had a digital alarm clock by the bed, which I looked at. I immediately recognised the sounds as coming from a handgun: this type of weapon has a distinctive sound, totally different to a shotgun or rifle.

‘I have had experience of firearms since I was 11 years of age, when I shot rifles with the Sea Cadets. I remained in the Cadets until the age of 16. At the age of 17, I joined the Royal Marines, staying with them for 18 months. During my time with the Marines, I was trained on the Browning 9 mm semi-automatic pistol, self-loading rifles, Lee Enfield rifles, American M16 rifles, German Mausers and Lugers. Since leaving the Marines, I have not had any dealings with firearms but, like riding a bike, you never forget what you have learned and the sound each weapon makes.

‘I can’t say how far away these shots were; all I can say is that the sounds definitely came from the back of my house.

‘I have been asked if I will return to the United Kingdom and give evidence; I can state that I will not. Whilst living in the Leigh-on-Sea area I would frequent the Woodcutters Arms and I am all too aware of the reputation of the people that use this pub and those charged in connection with the murder. I would fear for not only my safety, but for that of my family should I return as a witness. I have also been asked if I would consider giving evidence by video link; I will not for the reasons already explained.’

Osborne’s statement was encouraging for the police. Here was a man with an excellent knowledge of firearms who had not only heard two or three shots around the time Boshell was believed to have died but also had identified them as coming from a handgun. Such knowledge and expertise would surely impress a jury.

When Alvin, Griffiths, Percival and Walsh appeared at Chelmsford Crown Court to stand trial, they all pleaded not guilty to the charges they faced.

During the first week of the proceedings, the jury was sworn in and the opening speeches made, but in the second week, due to legal arguments, the jurors were removed from the room. The prosecution wished to introduce as evidence the notes the police had made when Boshell had been giving information about his associates. These notes would prove extremely damaging to Alvin’s defence and so he had instructed his legal team to oppose the application. The defence claimed that Boshell had been a fantasist whose word could not be relied upon. To highlight the fact, a letter written by Boshell whilst in prison was read out, in which he talked about taking a knife from a fellow inmate and repeatedly stabbing him after he had been set upon by a gang. It was proved beyond doubt that no such incident had ever occurred.

Using Boshell’s word to help convict a defendant of murder would, the defence argued, be at best unsafe. Another problem with permitting Boshell’s evidence to be used was that the defence would not have an opportunity to cross-examine him.

During the course of these legal arguments, the judge invited prosecuting counsel and two police officers involved in the case into his Chambers so that he could be made aware of some of the unused material, which included police intelligence reports regarding the alleged identity of Boshell’s killer.

Defence lawyers were not invited to attend this meeting and were therefore unable to make representations on behalf of their clients. It is understood that only intelligence accusing Percival of the murder was put before the judge. Apparently, the judge had given prosecuting counsel his opinion that they might like to reconsider the ‘central’ direction in which the prosecution were heading. The meaning was clear: the judge thought that it should be Percival facing the murder charge, and not Alvin.

When the judge ruled that Boshell’s evidence could be used, Alvin was crestfallen. Fearing he might be convicted of murder, he immediately announced that he wished to talk to his barrister in private.

‘At this stage in the proceedings I wasn’t happy,’ Alvin said. ‘I was getting worried about the possible outcome of the trial. I began to realise that my legal team were talking sense. They had informed me that there was a good chance that I would be convicted if I didn’t tell the police the full story. They didn’t know the truth – all they knew was that I was denying the murder.

‘The trial was adjourned and I was given the weekend to contemplate my future. I spent it in my cell with Percival. I don’t think he really knew what was happening. He just talked to me about his brother Danny. He said he had identified two jury members involved in our trial that he planned to approach. One of these was a young blonde girl that he believed he knew and the other was a young lad who drove a Citroen C2. Percival said that Danny had followed at least one of these jury members. I don’t know what happened in the end, but Percival said that Danny was going to offer them a bribe.’

Despite all the serious allegations that Alvin has made about Danny Percival throughout this story, the police have not spoken to him once. Danny is self-employed, he is in a long-term, stable relationship and has no criminal convictions. He loves his brother Ricky dearly but says there is no way he would have tried to bribe jury members on his behalf.

‘Ricky was facing a charge of perverting the course of justice, not murder. If he had been convicted of that offence, which I doubt, he would have been sentenced to two or three years’ imprisonment. Ricky had spent a year in prison awaiting trial. That means he would have had to serve about another six months. Am I really going to offer two jurors thousands of pounds and risk going to prison myself to prevent my brother serving just a few more months? Alvin’s lies are impressive to people who are denied the facts that may prove or destroy them. That’s why so many people believed him in the end. He was allowed to make outrageous allegations about me and the police didn’t even bother asking me if they were true. They were just accepted and read out in court as fact.’

Throughout the weekend at Chelmsford prison, Alvin pretended to be his normal self with Percival, but behind the mask he was plotting and scheming against his unsuspecting friend. Alvin had decided that Percival was his get-out-of-jail card, which he could use at any stage of the game he was playing to get him out of trouble.

On Monday morning Alvin discussed his prospects with his legal team in an interview room at court. They advised him that the evidence against him was not favourable and there was every possibility that he would be convicted of murder and sent to prison for life. In a corner and out of ideas, Alvin played his final card. He told his legal team that Percival was responsible for Boshell’s murder and, although present, he himself had played no part in the killing.

Alvin’s defence team made the prosecution aware that their client wished to make a fresh statement, and when the judge was informed of this development he granted an application by the prosecution to adjourn the case. The jury was discharged and the judge allowed Alvin as much time as he needed to make his new statement in full. Instead of being returned to HMP Chelmsford that evening, Alvin was taken into police custody so that he could give his latest version of events.

In the first of many interviews, DC Sharp told Alvin, ‘Through your legal team you served a further defence statement in which you indicated that you were not actually responsible for the murder of Dean. You described in some detail how Mr Percival committed the murder and how a man named Trevor Adams, although not party to this charge at the present time, was asked to assist in some way. I must inform you that you’re not viewed as a witness for the prosecution and you must understand that your cooperation does not mean that the case against you will or may be discontinued. Any information you do provide will, together with the results of any subsequent police investigations, be passed to the Crown Prosecution Service for its further consideration of the case against you.’

The police, working quite correctly within the tight restraints of procedure, knew that if the charge against Alvin was not discontinued he could simply say, ‘I made the story up so that I would be given a less severe sentence. Percival and I are, in fact, totally innocent.’ The case against him and Percival would then collapse.

Alvin breathed an inward sigh of relief because he knew that he was home and dry. The freedom for which he had been prepared to stab himself, steal wreaths from graves and tell continual barefaced lies was ensured.

All Alvin had to do was tell a convincing story that tied in with the evidence that the police had collected and the murder charge against him would be dropped. His was an easy task.

For a year, Alvin had been locked away in a prison cell studying copies of every document, witness statement and crime-scene photograph relating to the murder of Dean Boshell. Any story Alvin eventually came up with indicating Percival’s guilt was bound to have a ring of truth about it. In the weeks and months that followed Alvin was interviewed on an almost daily basis. After contradicting himself, ‘forgetting things’ and then miraculously remembering them, the final draft of his statement concerning Boshell’s murder was, he says, the definitive truth of events that night.

‘I suppose it started about two weeks before Dean’s death,’ he said. ‘I was invited by Percival to go on a job that involved robbing a large amount of skunk which he said was growing in a barn in the Chelmsford area. He said that the drugs would be worth in the region of £80,000. You don’t have to steal the whole skunk plant because it’s only the buds that are useful. It was decided that we would wait until the rightful owners had taken the buds off, bagged them up and then left them out to dry. The theft could then take place without us having to do any of the hard graft. We spoke about the job and Ricky told me that it was going to be me, him and one other who were going to do it.’

Alvin claimed that he and Percival had then discussed employing Boshell as the driver for the job. ‘I wouldn’t want to drive the van around at night with 25 kilos of skunk in it, and neither would Ricky,’ Alvin said. ‘Skunk has a very distinctive, strong smell. A van being driven in the middle of the night is likely to be stopped by police, therefore I definitely didn’t want to be found in the van. I was happy to drive my own car, either in front or behind it en route.’