Exhibit 06

Subsequent Charges


As Exhibits 4 & 5 make clear, Peter Risdon was originally charged with a variety of offences relating to his attempted insurance fraud using false identification to retrieve a diamond from a branch of the Midland Bank on 13th March 1991 - which he would later deny in a number of postings and in a ‘review’ of DG’s book written by him using the pseudonym of ‘Unforgiven’ on Amazon.com (see Exhibit 49).

As Exhibit 7 makes clear, those charges were dropped within days of his providing police with a statement in which he grasses on DG and BM regarding his role in their successful heist in New York almost exactly one year previously. Readers may ask themselves whether or not this is a coincidence.

The inference is obvious – Peter Risdon had grassed on Guppy and Marsh in return for lenient treatment.

And this is in fact confirmed by the New York Police officer in charge of the investigation into Guppy and Marsh during a television documentary, an excerpt of which can be seen in
Exhibit 1.

It is equally obvious from the evidence, and in particular from his police interviews, that Risdon had been angling for just such an eventuality from very shortly after he was originally arrested. See
Exhibits 8, 9 & 10, in particular where he speaks on several occasions about wanting to discuss DG and BM but not in ‘formal interview context.’ The evidence also makes clear that just such informal discussions occurred between Risdon and his police handlers on a number of occasions at a pub along the Embankment shortly after his release from Wormwood Scrubs on bail. Alarmingly, either no notes were taken by police or else what notes were taken were subsequently lost because the police were unable, for some reason, to produce them at the trial of DG and BM.

In Peter Risdon’s statement to the police he excused his own criminality by arguing that he had been ‘duped’ into participating in the New York heist, or ‘framed’, as he would subsequently put it in his ‘Freeborn John’ website and his Amazon.com ‘review’ of DG’s book (See
Exhibit 49) and in a number of other blogs, including Exhibit 52. In other words, according to his version of events, he had had no idea that he was committing an offence despite the fact that he had tied up DG and BM in a New York hotel room, fired a gun at them and made off with 2 Million Pounds’ worth of gems. His exact words in his statement to the police were that he had thought he was taking part in a “25,000 book-keeping exercise.”

Needless to say, this must rank as one of the most ludicrous excuses given for a criminal act in the history of law-breaking.

The charges against Peter Risdon were subsequently re-introduced in late 1992, upon the advice of Prosecuting Counsel, some eight to nine months after having been dropped, predominantly because a complete ignoring of Risdon’s criminality was considered too unsubtle by the Crown Prosecution Service, even by the standards of the South East Regional Crime Squad. However, by that stage, Police officers investigating DG and BM had already travelled to South Africa and confirmed that Risdon’s criminal partners would not, unlike him, be turning police informer against him. (See
Exhibits 11 & Exhibit 12).

With no witnesses the case against Peter Risdon was never going to go very far and indeed it was never even put before a jury, being dismissed by the trial judge shortly after the trial against Peter Risdon had begun.

In his website and on a number of blogs including
Exhibit 52, Peter Risdon claims that this fact somehow exonerates him.

However, as the police themselves make clear in their interviews with both Peter Risdon himself (see
Exhibits 8, 9 & 10) and with his chief accomplice in his attempted insurance fraud involving a diamond (see Exhibit 12), they were never in any doubt about his criminal intentions.

The fact moreover that they charged him would tend to corroborate this, unless of course Peter Risdon is arguing that the South East Regional Crime Squad were in the habit of charging people they knew to be innocent of any wrongdoing.

Indeed, Risdon himself confesses his guilt at the end of one of his police interviews – at least as far his attempt to deceive the bank is concerned (See
Exhibit 10).

As he puts it himself to the police at the end of that interview:

“I’m not going to insult your intelligence.” 

Nor should readers have any difficulty in determining, upon reviewing the evidence for themselves, exactly what Peter Risdon’s intentions had been with regards to the diamond and his attempt to retrieve it from the Midland Bank using a forged passport.

In one article given to Vanity Fair in 1993, one of the officers from the South East Regional Crime Squad involved in investigating DG and BM asserted that, as well as hoping for leniency for his own criminality, Peter Risdon had also been motivated by the fact that DG and BM had refused to give in to his blackmail. (Risdon had repeatedly sought to blackmail DG and BM over his role in their heist, something that is also confirmed by Risdon’s former business partner, BMcL. See
Exhibits 2 & Exhibit 3).

Back to Top up arrow

[Main] [The Fantasy] [The Facts] [Exhibits] [Conclusion]