Before and during my Official Secrets Act trial John Kelsey-Fry QC was the Prosecution go-between with the Defence team, talking with my barrister Gary Summers about what was happening in the case. Obviously, one important matter that was not discussed was that the Prosecution were planning an ambush on the Defence over the so-called "evidence" about the ALARM missile.
The evidence of Professor Meirion Francis Lewis was clearly known to the Prosecution prior to my trial in September of 1993, because they had some well rehearsed questions about what would be presented to the jury.
John Kelsey-Fry must have known that this evidence was about to be presented in court - so why did he not tell his Defence counter-part that this evidence about ALARM was likely to be coming up in court? Surely this looks like John Kelsey-Fry is part of some bigger plan to damage the defence case by underhanded methods? This just goes to demonstrate that the legal profession is full of characters like John Kelsey-Fry, who are only too willing to act unethically in order to win a case.