Chapter 7

The phone awoke the house early on Thursday morning. Claire answered and called to John to pick up his own. The police officer handling his case was ringing to tell him that Peter and Thomas were now in transit from Cumbria to the city and would be brought before the magistrates at two that afternoon. John as the victim was welcome to attend.

The constable went on to say that if they pleaded guilty the procedure would be over that day; if not guilty, they would be remanded, probably in custody since there was a flight risk, for a later trial when he would be required to give evidence.

Claire and John independently wanted to talk through what had happened so suddenly, but John was insistent that he wanted to attend the hearing, so there was no time for that. Claire worried about the effect her presence might have on the proceedings so she wouldn’t go. She knew it would simply cause trouble. So John would go alone.

In fact Claire drove him to the Magistrates’ Court but remained in the car while he attended the hearing. She wondered why he wanted to be there, but did not ask him.

John was by nature a peacemaker. He worked to make people feel better. It was why he visited the sick in the parish and helped with the homeless. He took seriously the Sermon on the Mount: love your enemies and do good to those who hate you.

He was worried about the effect Claire’s absence might have on the family, and wished to mitigate the effects. If Peter or Thomas went to prison it would tear the family further apart.

On entering the court building he asked to speak with the defence solicitor. When the man arrived, John asked what might be the outcome. Prison was a real possibility since the two men had forced their way into John’s home and seriously assaulted him.

John asked if he would be able speak at the trial. The man looked worried and asked what John wanted to achieve. He explained. The man was surprised and suspicious, but John spoke to him at some length and in the end he nodded his puzzled agreement.

“You can make a victim’s statement before sentence,” the lawyer said. “I’ll let the clerk to the court know.”

John entered the court and espied Peter and Thomas in the dock. Thomas was tall and well built with a handsome face, a good head of light brown hair and a short cropped beard. Peter was shorter though still quite tall, and the word ‘chubby’ came to mind. His face was florid and he had the build of an executive who tries to look after himself but has too many business lunches to keep his weight down.

So began a strange preliminary trial. Peter Klinsman and Thomas Klinsman were asked to confirm their names and addresses. Then they were read the accusation, which was of aggravated trespass and inflicting actual bodily harm with intent, and were asked how they would plead. Both pleaded guilty.

The prosecuting solicitor outlined the events and catalogued the injuries caused to John Pollard. The defence solicitor, did not offer any mitigation.

The magistrates conferred with the clerk of the court for some time. Then chair of the magistrates looked up. “Is Mr John Pollard in the court?”

“I am, Your Worship,” John replied, standing up gingerly.

“You have asked to make a victim’s statement before sentence. You may speak from your place. In view of your injuries you do not have to stand.”

“Thank you, Madam,” said John. “This act originated from a misunderstanding between Mr Peter Klinsman and his wife, Mrs Claire Klinsman. He was under the mistaken impression that I was having an affaire with his wife, and that she was living with me.

“This was why he pushed into my house, I am sure. He thought to catch her ‘in flagrante delicto’ at my house. I am also sure that he did not intend to injure me because he is a religious and very moral man. He pushed open the door violently to gain entrance and I just happened to be behind it. The door caught me in the face and I fell against the wall and hit my head. That was an accident.

“He must have searched the house for his wife and found she was not in fact with me. There was nothing of hers in the house. Therefore he would never have inflicted the other injuries. He is innocent of all charges, other than being in love with his wife and loyal to his son. I forgive him any injuries he may have unwittingly caused me.

“Thomas believed that I had taken his mother from his father, and I suspect he was the one who inflicted the other injuries. I’m asking that you treat his mistaken anger against me with leniency. He has a wife and a young family. He lives in the Netherlands and any sentence involving residence here will punish his family more than it would him. I suspect he would also lose his job which would inflict poverty on the family.

“His loyalty to his father and mother needs to be considered, even if his actions were impetuous and in error. He is a good man with a strong sense of right and wrong and has never been in any trouble. I ask you to consider the background to this unfortunate occurrence before enacting anything which will hurt or injure their families. Thank you for allowing me to speak.”

“I have to say that this was the most unusual victim’s statement I have ever heard,” said the Chair. “We need to confer, but shall not withdraw.”

There followed a protracted discussion between the three magistrates and the clerk of the court. Then the chair, who was a woman, spoke.

“Peter Klinsman, you pleaded guilty to the charges, but from the statement by Mr Pollard it seems unlikely that you deliberately caused the injuries to which you have pleaded guilty. You have Mr Pollard to thank for that. You are discharged conditional upon your not offending in the next year.

“Thomas Klinsman, you are guilty of a serious offence against Mr Pollard. Be in no doubt that the bench would have committed you in custody to the Crown Court for a longer prison sentence than we can impose. You would have been looking at years, not months in prison. Your victim could well have died.

“However, Mr Pollard seems more concerned for your family’s wellbeing than for any punishment the court might impose. Solely as a result of his statement, you will instead be sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, the maximum we can impose, but suspended for one year. Your solicitor will explain what that means. I hope you realise your indebtedness to your victim.”

The clerk did his usual case closing rigmarole and the court was adjourned. John left immediately, his job done to his satisfaction, he got into the car and they drove back to the house in silence.

Once inside the house, Claire buttonholed him. “Come on John, tell me! What happened?”

“What do you want me to tell you?”

“Don’t be obtuse!” she snapped at him. “What happened?”

“They pleaded guilty to all the charges.”

“Oh God! Are they in prison?”

“They were going to be committed to the Crown Court in view of the violence and my injuries.”

“But? I sense a ‘but’ there. What happened? Come on John, tell me.”

“I made a victim’s statement.”

“I knew you were up to something. What did you say?”

“I was worried that they might have to go to prison,” John said. “They would have been remanded in custody for months. That would wreck their lives and your family would be in serious trouble. So I pleaded for their release. Peter was conditionally discharged and Thomas sentenced to six months in prison suspended for a year. They can go home.”

Claire stood stunned by his statement. Then, aware of his battered ribs, she carefully put her arms round John’s neck and kissed him full on the lips, softly, at length and with some passion.

“Thank you so much John,” she whispered with tears in her eyes. “I don’t know how you could have done that, but thank you so much.”