Vicky Pryce found guilty (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Vicky Pryce found guilty
2:47pm Thursday 7th March 2013 in News
By Julian Robinson, Eastleigh Chief Reporter
Vicky Pryce
THE ex-wife of disgraced Chris Huhne has been found guilty of perverting the course of justice.
Vicky Pryce admitted taking speeding points on behalf of the shamed former Eastleigh MP in 2003.
The top-flight economist had denied the offence of perverting the course of justice using a defence of marital coercion - a legal argument available only to wives.
But jurors at Southwark Crown Court found the mum-of-five guilty of the charge.
The jury in Pryce's original trial failed to reach a verdict, prompting a retrial,
Her husband, the former Energy Secretary Chris Huhne, sensationally pleaded guilty to a similar charge last month and immediately resigned as Eastleigh MP.
He has been warned he faces a jail term when he is sentenced.
A date will now be set for the pair to be sentenced.
Pryce looked open-mouthed in shock as the foreman told the court the jury, which retired at 3pm on Tuesday, had reached a unanimous guilty verdict.
Judge Mr Justice Sweeney granted Pryce bail until sentencing, a date for which has not been set, when he will also sentence Huhne.
He told the economist, as he had told Huhne, to be under no illusion of what sentence to expect.
''Obviously Ms Pryce was present when I indicated to Mr Huhne the inevitable consequences of a conviction for an offence of this sort.
''She must be under no illusions that my granting of bail indicates any watering down of that provisional approach.''
He thanked the jury for discharging their task ''assiduously'' in a case which could not have been easy.
A jury in Pryce's original trial failed to reach a verdict, demonstrating what were described as a deficiencies in understanding, sparking a retrial.
The allegations date back to 2003, when Huhne's black BMW was clocked speeding on the way back from Stansted Airport as the then-MEP travelled back from Strasbourg.
Huhne already had nine points on his licence and risked a ban, something he feared would ruin his chances of being nominated as the Lib Dem candidate for Eastleigh.
Pryce said he made her take the points, waving a pen at her forcing her to sign a form.
Huhne, now 58, lost his licence anyway later that year for another offence but went on to be nominated as the Lib Dem candidate for Eastleigh, winning the seat in 2005.
The allegation about the points-swapping became public in May 2011 when it was published in two Sunday newspapers - nearly a year after Huhne ended his 26-year marriage to Pryce.
He confessed to an affair with PR adviser Carina Trimingham, below, in June 2010 during half-time of a World Cup football match, after learning he was about to be exposed.
To seek revenge, Pryce - with the help of lawyer and part-time judge Constance Briscoe - embarked on a press campaign to ''nail'' Huhne.
Briscoe has since been arrested and was dropped from the case as a witness after it emerged she lied to police about her dealings with the press.
The women first approached the Mail on Sunday, falsely claiming Huhne had passed points to constituency aide Jo White.
Pryce went on to reveal the story to Sunday Times political editor Isabel Oakeshott in March 2011 and the women discussed how to ''nail'' Huhne.
The revelations that Huhne had passed points to ''somebody'' ran in both the Sunday Times and Mail on Sunday on May 8 2011 and as the story snowballed, it emerged it was Pryce.
Huhne and Pryce were arrested, and in February last year were charged with perverting the course of justice.
Huhne, then energy secretary, stepped down from the Cabinet, vowing to fight the charges.
But when lengthy attempts by his legal team to get the case thrown out failed, he changed his plea on the first day of trial, resigning as Eastleigh MP, above, ending his once-promising political career.
During her trial Pryce, a mother-of-five, told the court her ex-husband prioritised his political ambitions throughout their marriage, forcing her to compromise her own career.
She revealed in court that Huhne demanded she have an abortion in 1990 because it would be bad for his career, but she went on to resist the same demands two years later, giving birth to their youngest child.
Pryce, who was given glowing testimonials from figures including former head of MI6 Sir John Scarlett, said she had been left fragile by her break-up, and wanted to expose Huhne's wrongdoing, but not ruin his career.
Her barrister Julian Knowles QC said the prosecution description of her as a ''tough, armour-plated career woman'' was false.
But prosecutor Andrew Edis QC said Pryce was a capable, manipulative and intelligent woman who acted of her own free will.
Assistant Chief Constable Gary Beautridge, from the Kent and Essex Serious Crime Directorate, which investigated the offence, said: ''The conviction of Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce has been achieved through the thorough and steadfast investigation conducted by officers and specialist staff at Essex and Kent Police.
''Perverting the course of justice is a serious offence.
''We hope this conviction serves as a timely reminder to motorists who try and avoid driving bans by 'giving' their points to others.
''This practice is not only unlawful, but has life changing consequences for those who get caught flouting the rules.''
- Senior Lib Dems deny knowledge of Huhne speeding saga
- The fall of a Cabinet Minister and his top economist wife
- What is marriage coercion defence used by Pryce
- The ten years from speeding fine to court for shamed MP
- CPS to apply for costs from Huhne
Comments(30)
nedscrumpo
says...
2:57pm Thu 7 Mar 13
MGRA
says...
3:16pm Thu 7 Mar 13
Stephen J
says...
3:19pm Thu 7 Mar 13
nedscrumpo wrote:It's certainly a rare and unusual defence, probably almost forgotten. If anything good can come out of this it would be that the law on coercion is re-examined and brought up to date. The last time it was even looked at was 1977.
why should marital coercion only apply to wives? Discriminatory piece of legislation which either needs to be equalised or got rid of altogether.
minnie64
says...
3:22pm Thu 7 Mar 13
MGRA wrote:Whats the betting they dont get a prison sentence - probably be suspended - just shows what a waste of money it was for the second hearing
he will get a shorter sentence for pleading guilty but then his would have been longer since it was his idea.... so..... both will probably get 6-9 and be out in 2-3.... She should have never used that defence. In any case as soon as she broke this story it was pretty obvious she was going down, if she was a shelf stacker with an agressive husband then thats one thing, but for her CV, I am not sure how she thought she would swing this one...
knac
says...
3:23pm Thu 7 Mar 13
biggus2
says...
3:42pm Thu 7 Mar 13
Nutstrangler
says...
3:56pm Thu 7 Mar 13
Shoong
says...
4:30pm Thu 7 Mar 13
Outside of the Box
says...
4:38pm Thu 7 Mar 13
sburman
says...
5:02pm Thu 7 Mar 13
Lone Ranger.
says...
5:19pm Thu 7 Mar 13
carolroads
says...
5:21pm Thu 7 Mar 13
skin2000
says...
5:36pm Thu 7 Mar 13
minnie64 wrote:Yes it will some deal when he will let to go to board meetings and she will let out to tell Radio 4 listeners how badly the economy doing.....in other words a suspended sentence?
MGRA wrote:Whats the betting they dont get a prison sentence - probably be suspended - just shows what a waste of money it was for the second hearing
he will get a shorter sentence for pleading guilty but then his would have been longer since it was his idea.... so..... both will probably get 6-9 and be out in 2-3.... She should have never used that defence. In any case as soon as she broke this story it was pretty obvious she was going down, if she was a shelf stacker with an agressive husband then thats one thing, but for her CV, I am not sure how she thought she would swing this one...
skin2000
says...
5:37pm Thu 7 Mar 13
sburman wrote:It was a good idea at the time.
That revenge plan went well then!!
good-gosh
says...
5:39pm Thu 7 Mar 13
TimTam
says...
5:44pm Thu 7 Mar 13
good-gosh wrote:Took his time though.
Her crimes are far more serious than his. She falsely signed the speeding docket and falsely claimed that she was made to do so (two deceptions). His offence was to keep quiet (one deception) but subsequently fully admitted his involvement. Far less serious.
stuartjebbitt
says...
5:59pm Thu 7 Mar 13
skin2000
says...
6:03pm Thu 7 Mar 13
stuartjebbitt wrote:And a huge fine.
Utter waste of taxpayers money to send either of them to prison. Neither poses any threat to the public, they lied about a speeding ticket, as many thousands of others probably have. All that was required was a 3 year driving ban each.
SOULJACKER
says...
6:20pm Thu 7 Mar 13
Huffter
says...
6:35pm Thu 7 Mar 13
stuartjebbitt wrote:It's not just about the driving offence - it's about perverting the course of justice - something no judge is going to take lightly!
Utter waste of taxpayers money to send either of them to prison. Neither poses any threat to the public, they lied about a speeding ticket, as many thousands of others probably have. All that was required was a 3 year driving ban each.
Bally_Hoo
says...
6:37pm Thu 7 Mar 13
MGRA wrote:The verdict does throw doubt on whether it was his idea for her to take the points and not hers.
he will get a shorter sentence for pleading guilty but then his would have been longer since it was his idea.... so..... both will probably get 6-9 and be out in 2-3.... She should have never used that defence. In any case as soon as she broke this story it was pretty obvious she was going down, if she was a shelf stacker with an agressive husband then thats one thing, but for her CV, I am not sure how she thought she would swing this one...
Either way, she knew she was acting illegally, but used this as a weapon aginst her husband.
They both deserve a spell in prison.
Stephen J
says...
6:44pm Thu 7 Mar 13
stuartjebbitt wrote:Not as simple as that. He maintained she had committed an offence which he knew he had committed. That could have led to the wrong person being found guilty of the offence. Simple perversion of the cource of justice. At the same time, she accepted the penalty for an offence she knew she hadn't committed. They conspired together to fabricate this situation and that's why they will go to prison.
Utter waste of taxpayers money to send either of them to prison. Neither poses any threat to the public, they lied about a speeding ticket, as many thousands of others probably have. All that was required was a 3 year driving ban each.
J.P.M
says...
8:37pm Thu 7 Mar 13
Thatcher and its family were obviously involved in their training.
Torchie1
says...
10:06pm Thu 7 Mar 13
J.P.M wrote:Privilege.
This pair of liars are the worst. They live in a world of privelege, and imagine that they are above the law.
Thatcher and its family were obviously involved in their training.
Nutstrangler
says...
11:18pm Thu 7 Mar 13
SOULJACKER wrote:You think so? What about that which he's got now, then ?
She should go to Jail just being so ugly :D
ben dover
says...
12:04am Fri 8 Mar 13
.......
st1halo
says...
2:05am Fri 8 Mar 13
Nutstrangler wrote:Yep, does Huhnie have a fetish for trannies or what?
SOULJACKER wrote:You think so? What about that which he's got now, then ?
She should go to Jail just being so ugly :D
Mark fan for ever
says...
6:57am Fri 8 Mar 13
Corrupt Judge is Next
says...
10:45am Fri 8 Mar 13
http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/news/politics
/liberaldemocrats/99
12373/Judge-Constanc
e-Briscoe-could-be-p
rosecuted-for-lying-
to-police-about-role
-in-exposing-Chris-H
uhne.html
About time! Also read: http://thetruthiscat
chingup.blogspot.co.
uk/
alanrr says...
2:54pm Thu 7 Mar 13
..jail