Taxi Driver Online

Taxi driver goes on trial for lover's murder 17 years after she vanished

A married black cab driver murdered his mistress over 17 years ago and then disposed of her body so that it has never been found, a court heard today. Kevin Doherty killed mother-of-two Jane Harrison before constructing a false alibi and even pretending to receive phone calls from her in front of witnesses, a jury was told.

Miss Harrison, 32, who had a one-year-old son with Doherty, disappeared without a trace in June 1995 just before the couple were about to go on a family holiday to Florida. Doherty, 57, who also had three children from his marriage, had a volatile three-year affair with her after they met in a nightclub in 1992, the Old Bailey heard.

They would frequently row and split up, but Doherty told detectives he kept going back to his lover because he was “besotted” with her. He is alleged to have murdered Miss Harrison and taken her body to a lock-up garage while pretending to be scouring the streets looking for her.

Doherty was questioned by police about his mistress’s disappearance at the time but was not charged with her murder until May last year. The prosecution admitted that its case was “circumstantial” because Miss Harrison’s body had not been discovered, there was no direct evidence that Doherty was responsible for her death, and he had not confessed to the crime.

Jonathan Rees QC, for the Crown, said: “We are not in a position to call any eye witnesses who claimed to have seen the murderous attack or any CCTV evidence recording the event. "There is no evidence that this defendant has admitted he has killed Jane Harrison. Instead the prosecution rely on what is commonly referred to as circumstantial evidence."

On the day of her disappearance, Miss Harrison went shopping with Doherty, who claimed he dropped her off at her mother’s home and then went to her flat in Highbury, north London. He later rang the flat’s landline using his mobile and pretended the calls were from his lover in front of a babysitter and Miss Harrison’s teenage son, Ryan, the prosecution alleged.

The jury was told that when the babysitter left, she saw Doherty leaning against a window muttering, "Oh God. What a nightmare," and looking "sweaty and panicky". Mr Rees said: "He had every reason to be, say the prosecution. This purported call from Jane to the house was nothing more than a continuation of a charade."

The prosecutor alleged that there was a discrepancy between the time when Doherty said he dropped Miss Harrison off and when he returned to her flat, which could be explained by him taking her to his lock-up garage in Walthamstow, east London.

When Doherty arrested, he told police he had an on-off relationship with Miss Harrison, sometimes breaking up with her and returning to live with his wife. Mr Rees said: "He said he did not kill Jane Harrison and they had not argued. He said he was not a jealous person even though they had split up on a number of occasions. He said he kept going back and was besotted with her. It was a sexual thing and he was not in love with her."

Doherty, from South Woodford, east London, denies murder. The trial continues.

_________________
IDFIMH

sounds like a difficult one to prove I suspect there will not be a trial unless they get a confession or find the body which after 17 years would probably not yield much evidence

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

The trial has already started.

_________________
Grandad,

If all they have is circumstantial evidence after 17 years, I'm surprised it ever made it to court. I wonder what they have by way of circumstantial evidence, that they didn't have 17 years, ago. This sounds like a huge stretch to me.

Can a case be proved "beyond all reasonable doubt", with just circumstantial evidence?

Methinks not.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

Methinks I agree.

_________________
Grandad,

I know of a case where two people were charged, one with murder and the other with disposing of a body - yet no body has ever been found.
And there's been a few cases in the past year that have been on the national news where people have been charged with murder (can't remember if they were found guilty) and again no bodies have been found.

Still puzzles me how without a body or confession someone can be found guilty of murder, how do they know they aren't still alive ?

how many people a year go missing and are never found ? there are probably dozens more murders a year than we are aware of because in most cases unless the body is found nobody knows they have been killed. The country is littered with old mine shafts deep rivers building sites and plenty of secluded spots where a grave can be dug filled in and hidden not every one is going to be found so I suppose the courts are expected to work on the the balance of probability

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Criminal courts can't work on the balance of probabilities. They have to work on beyond reasonable doubt.

_________________
Grandad,

Indeed, but I was very surprised when I was told what BRD amounted to as a % i.e. 100% certain guilt - 0% certain innocence.

The answer was 75% +.

_________________
IDFIMH