1

IN THE SOUTHWARK CROWN COURT

Between:

R

v

CHRIS CAIRNS

[13.6.1970]

&

ANDREW FITCH HOLLAND

[7.1.1965]

OPENING NOTE

INTRODUCTION.

1. The first defendant, Chris Cairns is a retired professional cricketer

who played international test and one-day cricket for New Zealand for

17 years. He had a glittering career, winning 62 test caps and 215 caps

for one-day internationals. He captained the New Zealand cricket

team on seven occasions. He last played international cricket on the

8th January 2006.

2. Mr Cairns is described by his fellow cricketers as a hero and role

model; a legend. He was the golden boy in the cricket world whom

every cricketer wanted to emulate.

2

3. The second defendant, Andrew Fitch-Holland is a barrister and friend

of Mr Cairns.

4. When Chris Cairns retired from international cricket, he joined the

Chandigarh Lions in the Indian Cricket League. The Indian Cricket

League was a private cricket league where games were played in the

Twenty 20 format. Essentially what this means is that the game is

shortened by reducing the number of balls bowled to make it a more

exciting match. The Indian Cricket League was not supported by the

Board of Control for Cricket in India or the International Cricket

Council.

5. On the 27th of October 2008, Chris Cairns was suspended from the

Indian Cricket League. The public reason given for his suspension was

underperforming due to an ankle injury which put him in breach of

contract.

6. At the time and in the weeks and months that followed it was rumored

that Chris Cairns and others were involved in match fixing in the

Indian Cricket League.

7. Fifteen months after Chris Cairns’ suspension, on the 5th January 2010,

the Chairman and Commissioner of the Indian Premier League, Lalit

Modi posted this message on his twitter page: “Chris Cairns removed

from the IPL auction list due to his past record of match fixing. This was

done by the Governing body today”. Mr Modi also made a statement to a

journalist for the online cricket magazine, ESPN Cric-info UK, saying:

“We have removed Chris Cairns from the list for alleged allegations [sic]

3

as we have zero tolerance for this kind of stuff. The governing council

has decided against keeping him on the list.”

8. On the 22nd January 2010, Chris Cairns brought a libel action against

Mr Modi in the High Court in the UK. He said that Mr Modi’s words

were understood to mean that he was guilty of match fixing.

9. Mr Modi’s defence to the libel action was one of justification. That is

to say, that the words said about Chris Cairns were true.

10. Mr Cairns made a number of statements in advance of the High Court

hearing. He also gave evidence on oath. Mr Cairns repeatedly said in

statements and confirmed on oath before the court that he had never

cheated at cricket. This was untrue. The prosecution can demonstrate

that Mr Cairns had been involved in cheating at cricket, or match

fixing for some time. When he denied it, he was lying to the court. He

committed perjury.

11. The libel case took place at the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand

before Mr Justice Bean sitting without a jury. The case was heard in

the first half on March 2012. Mr Justice Bean did not hear from many

of the witnesses who will give evidence in this case. As a result of the

limited evidence that was available to the High Court, Mr Justice Bean

found in Mr Cairns’ favour and Mr Modi was ordered to pay £1.4

million in damages and costs.

12. It is important to stress at this stage that Mr Cairns is not being

prosecuted in this case for manipulating a cricket game. He is being

prosecuted for something far more serious: for manipulating the

justice system in this county.

4

13. You will hear evidence during this trial that match fixing was taking

place in the Indian Cricket League and involved players other than

Chris Cairns.

14. The police in the UK have not involved themselves with match fixing

that has taken place overseas. That has been left to the cricketing

regulatory body to deal with. [Duthie p 188]. However, bringing a libel

case in the UK courts which is known to be false; and trying to

persuade witnesses to lie in a UK court is a different matter.

15. That is what these two defendants have done.

16. The prosecution case against Mr Cairns is that he manipulated the

legal system in this county to his advantage.

17. Chris Cairns knew that he had been guilty of match fixing, he knew

that he had been suspended and he knew that what Mr Modi had

tweeted about him was true.

18. But Mr Cairns was an arrogant individual and very sure of the power

he held over the people around him. When he brought his libel action

in the High Court, he would have felt very confident that there would

only be little if any evidence saying he was guilty of match-fixing.

After all, the only people who knew for certain that Mr Cairns was

engaged in match fixing were those people who had been match-fixing

with him. Why would they want to give evidence to that effect in

court?

19. So Mr Cairns had a free rein: he could protest his good name and

spotless reputation to the rooftops, knowing or believing that he was

untouchable.

5

20. That is what Chris Cairns did: he lied in his witness statements, he lied

on oath and he arranged that others should give false evidence on his

behalf.

21. This brings me to the second defendant, Andrew Fitch-Holland. Mr

Fitch-Holland is a qualified barrister and long-standing friend of Chris

Cairns. [x 394-6] One witness described Mr Fitch-Holland as a “cricket

groupie.” [Hitchcock]

22. Chris Cairns’ legal team for the High Court action did not include

Andrew Fitch-Holland. Counsel who acted for Mr Cairns were Andrew

Caldecott QC and Ian Helme [xp 91]. Those lawyers were bound by

their professional code of conduct requiring them to act honestly and

not to mislead the court. They could advise that a witness provided a

statement but could not possibly ask witnesses to provide false

evidence.

23. That is where Mr Fitch-Holland came in.

24. Mr Fitch-Holland posted on his website: “Lead advisor to former NZ

captain Chris Cairns in his libel action against Lalit Modi. After the first

contested High Court Twitter trial, Cairns was awarded damages and

costs in excess of £1.4 million.” [x 338]

25. The “lead advice” provided by Mr Fitch-Holland was something no

respectable lawyer would provide: it involved trying to persuade a

witness to lie during the High Court case in order to support Mr

Cairns’ perjured/false evidence.

26. The witness in question who was approached by Mr Fitch-Holland will

give evidence in this case. His name is Lou Vincent. Mr Vincent was a

6

cricketer who played with the Chandigarh Lions at the time when Mr

Cairns was their captain in 2008. Mr Vincent not only knew that Mr

Cairns had fixed matches but Mr Vincent was involved in the match

fixing himself under the direct orders of Mr Cairns.

27. In March 2011, when Mr Cairns was preparing his libel case, he

contacted Mr Vincent and asked him to “write a letter for him to his

lawyers who were doing the case with Lalit Modi about how [Lou

Vincent] played in the ICL and [Lou Vincent] didn’t see any wrongdoings

there. He wanted [Lou Vincent] to give a statement that basically said

that there was no ‘fixing’, and more towards Chris, that he wasn’t

involved in any form of match-fixing in the ICL” [Vincent 65-6].

28. Both Mr Cairns and Mr Vincent knew that any such statement in the

terms requested would have been untrue. Mr Vincent (no doubt

worried about the seriousness of committing perjury) refused to

provide the statement.

29. Following this refusal, on the 23rd March 2011, Mr Fitch-Holland,

acting in the capacity of “lead advisor” to Mr Cairns, contacted Mr

Vincent using Skype. The purpose of the contact was to put pressure

on Mr Vincent. This can only have been done at Mr Cairns’ request. Mr

Vincent knew that Mr Fitch-Holland was a close friend of Mr Cairns

and must have had a good idea of what was going to be said. Mr

Vincent took the precaution of recording the Skype call.

30. You will hear the call itself: [see transcript]

a. “AFH: …between you and I we all know some of what is being

said is clearly true” [xp 4]

7

b. “AFH: …at the end of the day just because you give a statement

no one can force you to come to court, no one can force you to do

anything, you know” [xp 5]

c. “AFH: ..what they are saying is you were one of the eleven people

on the field in those games and from where you were standing

everything seemed okay full stop.

LV: that's obviously it's not you know because I it wasn't

AFH: well yeah so

LV: it's a big ask from me to sort of like you say in a legal

document to say something that isn't true

AFH: well that's right, well then again

LV: when I have not seen any um anything for what's happened

AFH: benefit yeah

LV: yeah you know what I mean now I'm not only am I

indefinitely waiting for a return on that involvement ah now I

have been legally asked to sort of be involved and from my

position

AFH: yeah

LV: it's like I feel like I'm being used again” [xp 5]

d. “LV: it's a horrible situation because I also want to be there for a

mate as well and Cairnsy has been a mate although you know

like I have said I am not proud of what has happened at all what

has happened has been something that I've I don't think I am it's

hard for me to live with what's gone on

8

AFH: I think the reality is that Harry will give a brief statement I

think Darryl will give a brief statement it's a question of who

does it first and I think unfortunately you are all looking at each

other and saying well I am not going to do it at the end of the day

someone is going to have to step up they really are cause I

otherwise it is just going to be, it's just not going to look good

LV: yea

AFH: I don't think this is ever going to go to court and if it does I

guess we put your statement in the shredder and you don't

appear as a witness end of um it's like a game of chicken I don't

want to blink before that fucker does, I know they'll settle.

LV: yeah, yeah

AFH: and Christopher he is not an idiot he's not going to stand,

he's not going to go to court and run the risk of standing up on

the witness stand and be made to look like fool and it all being all

over the papers so you know he won't run that risk he will back

down before then.” [xp 9]

31. Play the call.

32. The Skype conversation between Andrew Fitch-Holland and Lou

Vincent provides the clearest evidence that:

a. That Andrew Fitch-Holland knew that what Mr Modi was saying

was “clearly true”.

b. That Mr Vincent was saying the same thing: everything was “not

okay” and it was a “big ask” to “say something that was not true” in

a legal document.

9

c. That Chris Cairns was lying when he said everything on the field

was ok.

d. What all of this recognised was that Chris Cairns was indeed guilty

of match fixing.

e. That by denying it in sworn witness statements and on oath in

court, Mr Cairns was committing perjury.

f. That Mr Fitch-Holland was working in concert with Mr Cairns to

get a witness to lie in court to support his bogus libel claim. Both

Chris Cairns and Andrew Fitch-Holland, by inducing Lou Vincent to

give false evidence, were attempting to pervert the course of

justice.

33. See indictment.

EVIDENCE OF MATCH FIXING

34. Although Chris Cairns is not being prosecuted for cheating at cricket,

you will have to be sure that he did cheat before deciding whether he

is guilty of the charges that he does face.

35. The prosecution will present clear evidence that Mr Cairns was

repeatedly involved in match fixing from the time he joined the Indian

Cricket League. This evidence comes in the following forms:

a. That from 2008, Mr Cairns was openly boasting that match fixing

did not matter at the Indian Cricket League as it was not an ICC

event and that no one could ever prove it. [Adams]

10

b. That fellow players and umpires involve in matches with the

Chandigarh Lions in the Indian Cricket League saw Mr Cairns do

things on the cricket pitch, which “did not look right.” [Bond]

c. That Mr Cairns targeted players whom he hoped would help him

fix matches. You will hear from two such players. The first is

Brendon McCullum who is the current captain of the New

Zealand cricket team. Mr McCullum refused to have anything to do

with the proposal made by Mr Cairns. The second player that was

approached by Mr Cairns was corrupted by him and involved

himself in several games where he deliberately underperformed at

Mr Cairns’ request. That second person was Lou Vincent. It was

Lou Vincent whom Mr Fitch-Holland tried to persuade to lie in

court to support Chris Cairns.

CRICKET.

36. Cricket, for those who do not follow this sport, is a game played by

two teams of eleven players each. The game is played on a large

circular or oval field in the middle of which is a 22 yard long pitch

which had three sticks at each end called “stumps” each of which have

two small pieces of wood balanced on top called “bales”. Two

batsmen, one at each end of the pitch, take it in turns to face the

bowler who tries to hit the stumps and knock the bales off or to tempt

the batsman into hitting the ball in such as way that it can be caught in

the air by the fielding team. The bowlers bowl balls in sets of 6 balls,

known as ‘overs’. Balls hit particularly hard by the batsman can fly to

11

the edge of the field without touching the ground and these hits score

6 runs, if they go over the boundary. If the ball in these circumstances

reaches the boundary but runs along the ground they score 4 runs.

Balls struck by a batsman which are unlikely to reach the boundary

allow the batsmen to run back and forth between the stumps to gain

runs one at a time. If the fielders can reach the ball and throw it back

quickly enough to catch the batsmen running in between the stumps,

the bails can be knocked off and the player will be out. Another

12

the higher the odds against this happening and thus the greater the

winnings if such an event occurred.

39. If a player is corrupt he can manipulate such an outcome and win

large sums of money for himself and others either acting on his own or

more easily acting together with other corrupt players.

40. In legitimate gambling, the outcome is unknown or random. You can

make educated guesses. The more likely an outcome, the smaller the

odds and the less money you will win. The more specific a bet, the less

certain it is and the more you will win.

41. Where match fixing comes in is that, rather than leave these bets to

chance, the players in the game ensure the outcome. They fix the

outcome. So if you know that a bet is placed on the first batsman

being bowled out; or the second batsman scoring no more than five

runs, as a dishonest cricket player, you can make sure these things

happen.

42. There are many ways of match fixing: some involve spread betting,

some involve spot fixing: all involve betting huge amounts of money

on the outcome of at least some part of the game. All are attempts to

defraud bookmakers by a player or players taking a pre-arranged

action to fix the result of a match. All undermine the game itself.

43. What makes it match fixing as opposed to a lucky bet, it the

involvement of the player in determining the result.

44. Because it is harder to win that to lose, it is easier to fix a match by

underscoring rather than over scoring. The cricketer involved in

match fixing might not have the glory of a victorious game, but they

13

and those they work with can make a great deal of money on placing a

successful bet on the result which they themselves can determine.

CAIRNS MATCH FIXING

45. Chris Cairns was responsible for orchestrating match fixing games

involving the Chandigarh Lions. However, logic will tell you that in a

game involving 11 team members it is hard to fix a match

singlehandedly. If the aim is that your team only scores a limited

number of runs, you need the help of other players to make sure that

they under perform.

46. One of the dangers of match fixing is that your conduct on the field

may give you away. If you play to lose, rather than play to win,

spectators, umpires or honest players may wonder what on earth is

going on.

47. You will hear evidence in this case from umpires for the Indian Cricket

League tournament in 2008 who were suspicious of the behaviour of

certain players, specifically Chris Cairns. [Allan Jones p 224 and David

Brandon p226]

48. You will hear about specific matches in this case where innocent

parties, (those not involved in match fixing), found what was going on

during a game as most peculiar. We can cross-refer the observations

of the legitimate people with those who knew about the match fixing

to support the overall suggestion that what Mr Cairns was doing

during those games was fundamentally dishonest.

14

49. To use an example, you will hear about a match played on the 15th

April 2008 when Mr Cairns arranged that the match should be fixed.

Chris Cairns arranged to fix that match. He asked Lou Vincent (the

man on the Skype call) to help him. Additionally, you will hear from

legitimate people who were at the match who saw that something was

not quite right about the game.

CHRIS HARRIS and SHANE BOND

50. Chris Harris is a witness who will give evidence in this case. He was a

professional cricketer who played for a team called the Hyderabad

Heroes in the Indian Cricket League tournaments in 2007 and 2008 in

which Chris Cairns captained the Chandigarh Lions.

51. Mr Harris remembered two specific games which he thought were

peculiar. The first of those was a match played on the 15th April 2008.

He remembered Chris Cairns scoring really low (when he was

batting). At one stage, Mr Cairns hit a ball so as offered a simple catch

which was dropped by the other team. Mr Cairns then went for what

Mr Harris called “a silly run” and was run out. Mr Harris found this

very suspicious.

52. Mr Harris will also give evidence about a match that took place on the

13th October 2008 between the Chandigarh Lions and the Mumbai

Champs. Mr Cairns was the Captain on the Chandigarh Lions. The

Champs were batting first and one of the opening batsmen just kept

blocking the ball. He did not appear to want to score any runs. When

the Chandigarh Lions came to bat, they did not score well either. It

15

looked as if they were going to lose. It seemed that both sides were

deliberately trying to under perform.

53. However, everything changed when the Chandigarh wicketkeeper

came to bat. He clearly was not part of the objective to under-perform

and he tried to do what any honest player would do: to score some

runs. As a result of this player’s enthusiasm, the game changed

entirely and the Chandigarh Lions ended up winning having come

from a hopeless position.

54. In those circumstances, you would imagine that the captain of the

wining team would be happy. Not so with Mr Cairns. Mr Harris will

tell you that Mr Cairns was not very pleased at all.

SHANE BOND

55. Shane Bond was a cricketer who was playing for a team called the

Delhi Giants in the Indian Cricket league in 2008 when Chris Cairns

was the Captain of the Chandigarh Lions. Mr Bond also remembers the

match of the 13th of October 2008 and Mr Cairns’ lack of enthusiasm

then his team won.

56. What possible reason could there be for players deliberately trying to

lose a game other than the fact that bets had been placed on their

losing? This explains why Mr Cairns was so disappointed when the

wicketkeeper (who must have been honest) came to bat and actually

played the game properly.

57. So the first reason we say that you can be sure that match-fixing was

going on was because certain games were played in a suspicious way.

16

What we will look at next is the evidence of people whom Mr Cairns

tried to recruit to match fix on his behalf.

BRENDAN McCULLUM

58. Brendon McCullum is a professional cricketer who in 2008 was

playing in the Indian Cricket League for a team called the Kolkata

Knight Riders. Mr McCullum will be a witness in this case and will tell

you that Chris Cairns was one of his idols: someone he looked up to

and aspired to emulate. When Mr McCullum started to play cricket

professionally, it was Mr Cairns who was helpful and protective

towards him. The two men became friends.

59. When Mr McCullum was in Kolkata in 2008, Chris Cairns asked to

meet. The meeting took place in Mr Cairns hotel room at the Sonar

Hotel. Mr Cairns steered the conversation to the subject of spread

betting. Mr McCullum said he did not really understand how this

worked and Mr Cairns took out a piece of paper and explained the

process. Mr Cairns told Mr McCullum that everyone was doing it and

he didn’t want Mr McCullum to miss out. Mr Cairns told Mr McCullum

that he had a group of people working for him in the Indian Cricket

League. It was clear to Mr McCullum that Mr Cairns wanted Mr

McCullum to work for him.

60. Mr Cairns explained how he would be able to get Mr McCullum

between $70,000 to $180,000 per game. He also explained how he

was able to get the money back to New Zealand without people asking

17

questions. He said he had a man in Dubai who was an associate. He

bought property in Dubai, held it for a few years and then sold it. The

money then appeared clean.

61. Mr McCullum said he found it difficult to say no to Mr Cairns’ proposal

then and there, as Mr Cairns had been such an idol of his and he was

shocked at this proposal. Mr Cairns later telephoned Mr McCullum and

it was at that sage that Mr McCullum said he did not want to get

involved in the scheme.

62. When Mr McCullum returned to the UK, Mr Cairns asked to meet him

and the two met up in a café in Worcester. The two men were spotted

together by a cricketing fan [McCabe] who recognised them both. The

fan was able to provide a date for the meeting: the 11th June 2008

because New Zealand were playing Worcestershire in Worcester that

day. At the meeting, Mr Cairns asked Mr McCullum if he had changed

his mind. Mr McCullum said he had not.

63. Mr McCullum did not lodge an official report against Mr Cairns and his

dishonest proposal at the time. He ought to have done so. He will tell

you that he regrets that but explains it on the basis that Mr Cairns was

a hero of his.

64. However, Mr McCullum was sufficiently troubled by the proposal that

he did mention the approach to several people informally.

a. Whilst he was in India, Mr McCullum was represented by an agent

called Leanne McGoldrick. She represented a number of

cricketers. In July or August 2008, Ms McGoldrick remembered Mr

McCullum and his wife coming to her house for dinner. It was

18

during that evening while Ms McGoldrick’s husband was out of the

room that Mr McCullum asked her whether she thought that

anyone in the New Zealand cricket team could be involved in

match fixing. She said she did not. He then went on to ask her if

she thought Chris Cairns would be involved in match fixing or spot

fixing. She said she did not. Mr McCullum then went on to tell Ms

McGoldrick about the approach that had been made to him by

Chris Cairns. He said it had taken place a few weeks earlier in a

café or bar (she was not sure which). Ms McGoldrick asked Mr

McCullum if he had reported this approach and he said he had told

Daniel Vettori.

b. Daniel Vettori will give evidence in this case. He is a professional

cricketer. He will tell you about a discussion he had with Brendon

McCullum during which Mr McCullum said that he had been

approached by Chris Cairns to spot fix matches.

c. In late 2008, Mr McCullum met up with Shane Bond. Mr

McCullum told Mr Bond that he had been approached by Chris

Cairns in the UK and Mr Cairns wanted him to become involved in

match fixing. This ties in with the meeting that Mr McCullum said

took place in the café in Worcester on the 11th June 2008.

d. In late 2008 or early 2009, Kyle Mills remembers Mr McCullum

telling him that Chris Cairns had approached him about match

fixing.

e. Ricky Ponting, a former professional cricketer remembered a

conversation he had with Mr McCullum in a hotel room in 2008.

19

They were both team mates for the Kolkata Knight Riders at the

time. Mr McCullum received a telephone call which did not last

very long. When the call was concluded Mr McCullum said that it

was Chris Cairns and that he was making a business proposal. Of

itself this evidence is not conclusive but it dovetails with Mr

McCullum’s account.

f. It was not until February 2011 that Brendon McCullum made an

official report of Chris Cairns dishonest approach. It was during

the Cricket World Cup being held in India. An anti corruption

educational package was presented to the New Zealand cricket

team and their support staff by John Rhodes of the Anti

Corruption and Security Unit. The ACSU is a body charged with

enforcing a zero tolerance police toward cricket corruption

worldwide. On the 17th February 2011, following the anti

corruption educational package, Brendon McCullum made a

statement to the ACSU about Chris Cairns.

65. A word of warning about the witnesses whom Mr McCullum told

about Mr Cairns’ approach to match fix. They do not provide

independent evidence of Mr Cairns’ dishonest schemes. However,

their evidence is important, because it demonstrates that this is

something that Mr McCullum complained of a long time ago, pretty

near to the time of the approach itself. This is not something that Mr

McCullum has been made up recently out of spite. It was something

that genuinely concerned him.

20

66. Mr Cairns will say in his defence that Mr McCullum is lying. There was

no approach and there was no match fixing.

67. You will consider that defence with care. You will ask yourself why a

man like Brendon McCullum, who hero-worshipped Mr Cairns would

invent such a lie? You will ask yourself why Mr McCullum told people

of the approach at the time only and made no official complaint about

it? You will ask yourself why Mr McCullum would raise his head above

the parapet to become involved in a case, where he knows he is likely

to face challenge and to be discredited by Mr Cairns? Unless he was

telling the truth.

68. During the time that Mr Cairns was trying to corrupt Mr McCullum, Mr

Cairns told him about other players who were match fixing for him.

Two of the people named were Daryl Tuffey and Lou Vincent. See

Skype transcript.

LOU VINCENT

69. Whereas Brendon McCullum had the strength of character to resist

Chris Cairns proposals to become involved in match fixing, the same

had not been true of Lou Vincent.

70. Lou Vincent was a professional cricketer until he retired in 2013. At

the end of 2007, he was dropped from the New Zealand team and felt

that he had been badly treated. He became depressed and started

abusing cannabis and alcohol. His wife at the time, Eleanor, was a UK

national. She was supportive of Mr Vincent and it was agreed that

they would start a new life together in the UK.

21

71. In early 2008, Mr Vincent signed up to play with the Chandigarh Lions,

the team captained by Chris Cairns.

72. In around March 2008, Mr Vincent was in India and was approached

by an Indian male about what he described as a “sponsorship deal”.

The reality was that this was a proposal of match fixing. Mr Vincent

was offered money and the services of a prostitute. He refused both.

73. Mr Vincent immediately told his agent, Leanne McGoldrick about the

approach and she advised him that she would report the approach to a

senior official in the Indian Cricket League. Mr Vincent then decided

he ought to tell the captain, Chris Cairns.

74. As with Brendon McCullum, Lou Vincent looked up to and trusted

Chris Cairns. Mr Vincent told Mr Cairns that he had reported the

approach to the Indian Cricket League executive. Mr Cairns said that

he had done the right thing. Mr Cairns then went on to say that

reporting the approach would provide “good cover” and that Mr

Vincent was now working for him.

75. Mr Cairns told Mr Vincent that the Indian Cricket League was corrupt

anyway and they both deserved to get a piece of the pie. He said that

he would be paid $50,000 for each match that he fixed.

76. Mr Vincent told Mr Cairns about his mental health issues (being

depressed) and was worried that he felt sometimes that he could

hardly hold a bat. Mr Cairns response was that this would provide a

pretext for the fixing as it meant he was “guaranteed to under-

perform.”

22

77. Mr Vincent was never told the exact figure of runs he should achieve,

only that it would be around 10 to 15 runs off 20 balls and then to get

out.

78. Mr Vincent was told that there were four players in the team involved

in fixing: himself, Chris Cairns, Daryl Tuffey and a fourth man called

Dinesh Mongia. This information supports what Mr McCullum was

told by Mr Cairns.

79. Mr Cairns was openly discussing match fixing with Mr Vincent.

80. Mr Vincent remembered four games in which he underperformed on

Chris Cairns instructions. He interspersed these “fixed” games with

games where he played properly to avoid suspicion. The fixed games

were:

a. 25th March 2008: Chandigarh Lions v Mumbai Champs

b. 29th March 2008: Chandigarh Lions v Hyderabad Heroes

c. 26th March 2008: Chandigarh Lions v Kolkata Tigers

d. 15th April 2008: ICL India v ICL world team. That was the game

that the witness Chris Harris found peculiar.

81. During that last game, Mr Vincent’s fixing skills failed him and he

remained on the pitch until he was stumped for 28 runs from 27 balls.

Mr Cairns was not happy. Mr Cairns told Mr Vincent after the game

that he had cost him millions. He threatened to hit Mr Vincent at one

stage.

82. In April 2008, Mr Cairns treated his “fixers” to a holiday in Dubai

together with another team member who was not involved. Mr

23

Vincent got the impression that Mr Cairns was working for someone

in Dubai.

ANDRE ADAMS

83. Sometime between June and August 2008, Mr Vincent approached

another cricketer, Andre Adams, who was a close friend of his. Mr

Adams said that Mr Vincent put forward a proposal to make some

money by way of match fixing. Mr Adams was not remotely interested.

However, Mr Vincent had told him that Mr Adams knew that Mr

Vincent suffered from depression and was not going to report him

knowing that his metal state was fragile.

84. Mr Adams remembered the time at which Chris Cairns left the

tournament. There was an occasion when all of the New Zealand team

were having dinner. Chris Cairns was there. The conversation got

round to match fixing. Mr Cairns said: “It doesn’t matter here [at the

ILC] as it is not an ILCC event and the tournament is not even

sanctioned.” He added: “How will they ever prove it?”

85. That remark gives an indication of the confidence that Chis Cairns felt

that no one would dare speak out against him.

DISCLOSURES BY LOU VINCENT

86. In 2008, Lou Vincent told his wife, Eleanor, all about the match fixing.

She will be a witness in the case. She is estranged for Mr Vincent now

and her name is Eleanor Riley.

24

87. Eleanor Riley is able to give an interesting insight into the way Lou

Vincent was functioning in 2008. She described how he was in awe of

Mr Cairns.

88. Ms Riley was told by Mr Vincent about the first approach involving the

cash and the prostitute. Two weeks later, she received a telephone call

from Mr Vincent during which he was in tears. He told her that he had

just lost Chris Cairns $250,000 because he had done something wrong.

89. We can pin point this game as the one on the 15th April 2008.

90. Mr Vincent told his wife about the match fixing. Chris Cairns was the

ringleader. Chris Cairns would want Lou to underperform and score

low. Mr Cairns said that Lou Vincent was perfect for the job because

he was an unpredictable player. Players who always played well and

then underperformed were busted straight away. Being

unpredictable, if he scored low then no one else would be suspicious.

91. Lou Vincent’s wife was aware from talking to her husband that there

were signals given when a match was to be fixed: one such signal

would involve a player tapping his hat.

92. Mr Vincent told his wife that Chris Cairns had told the young players

in the team that if they did not do what he asked, they would never

play cricket again. These were young Indian players who were

desperate to play cricket and just followed Mr Cairns’ instructions.

93. Mr Vincent told his wife that Mr Cairns was going to pay him $50,000

per game. But he was never paid this after the last game. Mr Vincent

was angry about the money owed to him and in June 2008, he and his

25

wife flew to Dubai to see Chris Cairns. When money was discussed,

Mr Cairns said he did not have the money.

94. [Cross refer to Skype call].

95. I warned you about how to approach witnesses who provide second

hand information. So far, what Eleanor Riley has said was second hand

as it comes from Lou Vincent.

96. However, Eleanor Riley met Chris Cairns and had first hand

conversations with him on the subject of match fixing.

97. During the summer of 2008, Lou and Eleanor Vincent were at home in

Hale in Lancashire. Mr Cairns and his girlfriend turned up and the

four of them went out for dinner to a restaurant called the Manhattan

Grill in Altrincham together with anther cricketer, Freddie Flintoff.

Freddie Flintoff spent time just drinking. The conversation amongst

the other four turned to match fixing.

98. Chris Cairns was talking to Eleanor Riley about match fixing and

telling her not to worry about it. Eleanor said how concerned she was.

Mr Cairns said that because it had taken place in India, they were not

going to get caught. He kept telling her that they were safe.

99. Mr Cairns girlfriend was there and she was fully participating in the

match fixing conversation. Both she and Mr Cairns were reassuring

Eleanor that everything would be all right because everyone was

doing it.

100. As well as telling his wife about Chris Cairns, Lou Vincent also told told

other people. In late 2009, Mr Vincent told another cricketer, Phill

Hayes about match fixing. He said that it was going on all the time and

26

that Chris Cairns was the ring leader. Mr Vincent told Mr Hayes about

one incident in a match when he was meant to get out and tried to get

caught but scored a six. Mr Cairns had been really angry and

threatened him with a bat.

101. In August 2011, Lou Vincent spoke to Steven Pearson who was a club

cricket player and went to stay with Lou Vincent. Mr Vincent told him

all about his involvement in math fixing and how it started. Mr Vincent

told Mr Pearson that he would take direction from Mr Cairns

POST 2008

102. After Chris Cairns was suspended from the ICL in 2008, he stopped

telling Mr Vincent what to do.

103. Unfortunately for Mr Vincent, word was out in the match fixing

community that he would involve himself in underscoring and he

received many approaches from others who saw the game of cricket

as a dishonest scheme to make money. Lou Vincent had gone over to

the dark place. It was now almost impossible for him to go straight.

104. It was not until 2013 that Mr Vincent was able to come clean and

confess to officials the extent of his wrong doing.

THE LIBEL CASE: CHRONOLGY

105. On 21 January 2010 Chris Cairns issued proceedings against Lalit

Modi in the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice. He

27

claimed general and aggravated damages for libel and an injunction

restraining Lalit Modi from any further publication [xp 281-288].

106. The claim was amended on 5 April 2011 and on 21 December 2011.

The solicitor who signed the amended pleadings was Rhory

Robertson, a partner in Collyer Bristow LLP [xp 289-309].

107. Chris Cairns himself made three witness statements, all of which

concluded with the recital: “I believe that the facts stated in this witness

statement are true”. The statements are all signed by him and dated:

a. 11 October 2010;

b. 18 May 2011; and

c. 1 March 2012.

108. In his first statement Chris Cairns stated: “I have never, ever cheated at

cricket. Nor would I ever contemplate such a thing.” The statement

appears under a heading “The truth” [x 331]. At paragraph 21 the

statement continued: “what is alleged against me is utter rubbish and

deeply hurtful” [x 337]. At paragraph 30, Mr Cairns reiterated his

position: “I will not stand by and let the Defendant persist in the lie that

I am a cheat” [x 339].

109. In his second statement, Chris Cairns repeated his assertions that he

was not a cheat. He stated at paragraph 13, again under the heading

“The truth”: “I have never, ever cheated at cricket. Nor would I ever

contemplate such a thing” [x 346].

110. Chris Cairns’ third statement is prefaced by these words: “Before

dealing with specific matter which are raised I reiterate that I have

28

never cheated and cricket and would never contemplate such a thing” [x

379].

111. Chris Cairns gave evidence on oath in the libel case at the Royal Courts

of Justice on 5 and 6 March 2012 [x 92]. Relevant passages are as

follows:

a. He confirmed that the facts stated in the witness statements were

true and that he did not wish to amend or qualify anything in them

save the timing of the meeting at which his contract with the IPL

was terminated [x 92-93];

b. He stated that he was not dismissed for suspected match-fixing [x

150, 157, 173-4];

c. He stated: “I have never cheated” [x 156];

d. Further, “I am not a cheat….I am not a cheat” [x 192], “I am not a

cheat and I continue to say that” [x 209 and also at x 216.]

e. He stated that he had not instructed any batsman to underperform

[x 217-219].

112. The evidence given by Chris Cairns included some detail as to the

nature of his relationship with Andrew Fitch-Holland. He explained

that:

a. Andrew Fitch-Holland would give him advice as to contracts with

which he was presented;

b. Andrew Fitch-Holland gave him advice about how to deal with the

way he had been treated by the Indian Cricket League; and

29

c. When rumours began to circulate that he was a match-fixer, after

he had left the International Cricket League, he called Andrew

Fitch-Holland and asked him to “shut them down”.

113. In support of his bogus claim for libel, the following witnesses gave

evidence in support of Mr Cairns: Mrs Cairns; Andrew Fitch-Holland;

Darryl Tuffey. Despite being pressurised to do so, Mr Vincent neither

provided a witness statement nor gave evidence.

114. In August 2013 Lou Vincent voluntarily approached the New Zealand

Cricket Players Association and told them that he had been involved in

various incidences of match fixing during the past few years. In

interviews he gave to the International Cricket Council, Mr Vincent

gave details of his own involvement in match fixing including the fact

that he had been recruited into fixing by Chris Cairns during the

Indian Cricket League and that he had underperformed at Mr Cairns

request on a number of occasions during 2008. In his disclosures to

the International Cricket Council, Lou Vincent also described being

contacted by Andrew Fitch-Holland. Lou Vincent understood that Mr

Fitch-Holland was a barrister in the UK who was assisting Mr Cairns in

preparing for the High Court case. Mr Vincent said that Mr Fitch-

Holland tried to persuade him, Mr Vincent, to provide evidence

supporting Mr Cairns’ case that he had never match-fixed. Since he felt

that he was being asked to lie in a legal document he recorded the

conversation, which took place using Skype.

ARRESTS AND INTERVIEWS

30

115. On the 26th March 2014, Andrew Fitch-Holland was arrested at his

home address at Duddenhoe End Farm, Saffron Waldon in Essex. He

made no reply to the caution.

116. On the same day, Police in New Zealand in conjunction with the UK

police approached Chris Cairns in Auckland in New Zealand.

117. Both defendants were interviewed in the presence of their respective

solicitor.

CHRIS CAIRNS

118. On 1st April 2014, Chris Cairns was interviewed in the presence of a

solicitor under caution but not under arrest. He provided a full

account detailing:

a. His life, both personal and professional in 2008 including his exit

from the Indian Cricket League;

b. The rationale behind launching the libel action;

c. His assertion that the evidence he gave was entirely accurate and

was given of his own free will and with a full understanding of the

implications should he give false testimony.

d. His friendship with Andrew Fitch-Holland, who he described as a

cricket-obsessed friend who had given him advice about contracts

and legal issues.

e. His relationship with Lou Vincent, who he described as a colleague

with whom he has had little contact since the Indian Cricket

League and who he thought had some issues with depression and

drink.

31

f. His agreement that he had contacted Lou Vincent and asked him to

give a statement in support of his case at the High Court but that

Lou had implied that he wanted money in order to do so.

g. His agreement that he may have asked Andrew Fitch-Holland to

contact some people he wanted to give statements for him but he

wasn’t sure who and it would have been just to put some context

on what they were trying to achieve not to put any pressure.

119. He stated that Lou Vincent’s evidence was completely false. He had

never instructed Lou, or anyone else, to underperform in the Indian

Cricket League and the incident following the match on 15th April

2008 in the UK did not happen. [p 1-210]

120. On 26th May 2014, Chris Cairns was interviewed for a second time.

Again he gave a full account.

a. He agreed that there may have been an occasion where he met

Brendon McCullum in India and they may have discussed match

fixing or spread betting in general terms but he denied making any

approach to Brendon or telling him that he was involved in this in

the Indian Cricket League.

b. He stated that he may have been involved in arranging the Skype

call but denied that he would have asked Andrew Fitch-Holland to

put pressure on or hassle Lou Vincent to give a statement.

c. He considered passages of the evidence he gave in the High Court

where he stated he was not a cheat and would not instruct a

batsman to underperform and he stated that he stood by the fact

32

that this was genuine evidence and accepted that he had brought

the case on the basis that he was not a cheat. [p 211-262]

ANDREW FITCH-HOLLAND

121. On 26th March 2014, Andrew Fitch-Holland was interviewed in the

presence of a solicitor under caution following his arrest. He answered

no comment to all questions except to confirm that the voices that can

be heard on the Skype call are his and Lou Vincent’s. [p 263-278]

122. However, he indicated that if he was allowed full disclosure of the

entire Skype call or transcript then he would answer questions. He

was provided with a copy of the recording a week before he returned

on bail on 14th May 2014.

123. On 14th May 2014 Andrew Fitch-Holland was interviewed in the

presence of a solicitor under caution. He provided the following

account:

a. He had known Chris Cairns since 2006 and considered him a good

friend.

b. He had not formally represented Chris Cairns as a lawyer but

sometimes acted as a kind of agent for him.

c. Following the libel trial he had been annoyed with Chris Cairns as

he had been promised some payment if it was successful but none

had been forthcoming.

d. He described Chris Cairns as having been under some financial

pressures since splitting from his previous wife, Carin, in 2008.

33

e. He agreed that he had himself given a statement in the proceedings

and that he was well aware of the implications should there be

anything in the statement that he knew to be false.

f. He explained many of the passages of the Skype call set out above

as relating to the fact that the Indian players in the Indian Cricket

League had admitted some corruption as was laid out in Modi’s

defence.

g. He also stated that in general he wasn’t really listening to what Lou

Vincent was saying but more talking over him.

h. In response to the part where he said: “I don’t think it will go to

court and if it does then I guess we put your statement in the

shredder and you don’t appear as a witness” what he had meant

was that no-one could force him to go to court and that the

reference to the shredder was a literal one in the sense that

unused statements would get shredded eventually.

i. In relation to his statement that: “Christopher is not an idiot and

isn’t going to run the risk of standing up and being made to look a

fool” he said that he had always believed it would damage Chris

Cairns’ reputation to be subject to a full trial and cross

examination and that he had raised this with Chris Cairns.

j. He said that neither Chris Cairns nor Lou Vincent had ever

revealed themselves as cheats to him. [p 279-319]

124. On 25th September 2014 both defendants were charged.

34

125. In answer to charge, Andrew Fitch-Holland provided a prepared

statement in which he denied the charge and expressed his

disappointment at the decision.

126. CONCLUSION

127. BURDEN AND STANDARD OF PROOF

October 6th 2015