We have moved forward to June 29, 1967,
the third day of the trial relating to the Redlands
bust, held at Chichester Quarter Sessions and presided over by Judge Leslie
Block, 61 years of age and a former naval officer whose understanding of – and
sympathy with – pop culture could, in the words of author Simon Wells, be
measured in hundredths of milligrams. Two days earlier he’d taken no little
pleasure in the jury’s decision that Mick Jagger was guilty of possessing four
amphetamine tablets, contrary to the Dangerous Drugs act of 1965, and remanding
him in prison for the night.
In the morning of
day three Keith was defiant when he gave his evidence, memorably responding to
prosecuting barrister Michael Morris’ question about his lack of embarrassment
at a female guest wearing only a rug with, “We are not old men. We are not
worried about petty morals.” Such boldness probably worked against him,
however, for he too was found guilty, in his case of allowing his house in West
Wittering to be used for the smoking of cannabis. During the lunch break Jagger
and Robert Fraser had their meal brought to them in the cells, while Stones driver
Tom Keylock drove Richards to a country hotel.
Back in court for
the afternoon session, Mick and Keith, together with Fraser, are about to be
sentenced.
Their fate about to be read
out, Jagger and Fraser were brought up from the cells to join Richards in the dock. The sight of Mick, Keith and
Robert Fraser provoked a variety of emotions
for Marianne Faithfull. “I will never forget those court appearances,”
she recalled to the BBC in 2004. “Having to watch them in court and realising
the danger they were in, it was terrible. I will never forget how beautifully
they dressed. It was absolutely wonderful the way they used that court case for
their clothes.”
Permitted a final plea to the bench before sentencing, Michael Havers reiterated
that variants of the drugs found on
Jagger were freely prescribed in the
UK. With over 150 million tablets prescribed, Havers said that they
couldn’t really be classified as dangerous in any way. This, he said, was
backed up by Jagger’s physician. Furthermore, Jagger had endured three days of
misery and “shockingly adverse publicity”. Referring to photographs showing him
in handcuffs, Havers queried whether someone not possessed of Jagger’s
celebrity would be treated in this punitive fashion. With overseas work paramount
for such an internationally
famous musician, Havers called
for a measure of compassion to be shown.
Turning his attention to Richards, Havers said that there was no evidence to suggest
that “wholesale cannabis smoking” was occurring at Redlands. Additionally,
Havers pointed out that the Act employed to convict Richards was intended for
the prosecution of organised drug taking establishments operating solely for
profit, something that evidently wasn’t occurring at Redlands. Finally, Havers
offered his own character summation.
“He is a likable young man, who goes his own way… This young man of 23
has got to the age where all the temptations and emergencies thrust upon him by
all the extraordinary lifestyle he has led over the past four years are so much
greater than those the ordinary boy faces.”
With
that Havers rested his mitigation arguments, leaving the final act of the drama
to be enacted by those on the bench. Judge Block was no doubt wary of the
ramifications that could result from what had occurred over the last few days
and, with the global spotlight allowing legal observers to eavesdrop on events,
he knew that any slip would be seized upon by critics. Nonetheless, the law
permitted the bench, under his
advisement, to legitimately impose lengthy prison sentences. If, indeed,
Block chose to employ the full weight of the law, Fraser could be imprisoned
for seven years, Jagger for two
years and Richards for a substantial ten years.
While the jury in Richards’ case had taken their time in reaching a verdict, it took only a few
minutes of deliberation for Block and his colleagues to arrive at the sentences
for the three defendants. With the
sorry triumvirate of Jagger, Richards and Fraser standing as one in the
dock, their charges were read out again before sentencing could take place. As
protocol dictated, it was be delivered by the man who’d assumed the mantle of
the establishment. Standing before him were characters with whom he felt little
kinship, and whose reputation he’d attempted to trample underfoot. At the age
of 61, and representing a generation that felt betrayed by the brazen, lawless
antics of figures like The Rolling Stones, Judge Block could now roll out a
judgement that was commensurate with the resentment felt against them from his
quarter.
The time now was just
past 3:45 pm. A hush descended on the courtroom, lawyers on both sides
of the legal fence resting their enormous library of paperwork and looking up
at the bench. Outside, over 600 fans and curious onlookers had gathered to await
the verdict. There was an ominous quiet in the room as Judge Block read out the
first of the sentences.
“Keith Richards, the
offence for which you have very properly been convicted carries a
maximum sentence, imposed by Parliament, of up to ten years… That is a view of
the seriousness of the offence… You will go to jail for one year. You will also
pay £500 towards the cost of the prosecution. Go down.”
There were immediate cries of ‘No! No!’ and gasps of shock
from fans in the public gallery. A flurry of murmuring broke out between
reporters and other interested parties. Richards, it was observed, did nothing.
He simply stared blankly at the bench. Judge Block called for silence.
“Robert Hugh Fraser,
you have pleaded guilty to possessing a highly dangerous and harmful
drug. You will go to prison for six months. You will also pay £200 towards the
costs of the prosecution. Go down.”
On hearing this, Fraser noisily expended a large amount of
air from his cheeks, and then clicked the heels of his black patent shoes
together. With his celebrity restricted to London’s art world there were no
cries or screams from the
gallery.
With two of the Redlands Three sentenced to jail terms, any
immediate hopes for Jagger’s freedom appeared slim. While Keith’s sentencing
appeared grossly severe, the most pertinent question on everyone’s lips was
whether his fellow Stone would
meet a similar fate, his greater
popularity causing a pregnant
hush to fall as Judge Block prepared to read out the sentence.
“Michael Phillip Jagger,”
he began ominously. “You have been found guilty of possessing a
potentially dangerous and harmful drug. You will go to prison for three months.
You will pay £200 towards the costs of the prosecution. Go down.”
As the words left Judge Block’s mouth, Jagger put his hand to his face and
began to sway. With warders signalling that the trio should walk down to the
cells, Richards momentarily
clasped the wooden rail in front of him and glared over at the bench. During
their descent, the public gallery erupted in a cacophony of screams, shouts and
expressions of outrage. Jagger was evidently the most broken of the three and
as he was taken away by a warder, he glanced up towards the gallery at a grieving Marianne
Faithfull. In the few seconds allotted, the pair exchanged a sullen glance, and
even from her remote vantage point she could see that he was crying. He turned
and looked down the twelve stone steps leading to the cells, put his hands up
to his face and staggered forward.
“I just went dead,” Jagger would later recall. “It
was just like a James Cagney film, except everything went black.”
The Daily Telegraph, not then known for
expending emotional hyperbole on pop stars, was fairly poetic in its coverage
of the moment Jagger was convicted. “Jagger almost broke down and put his head
in his hands as he was sentenced,” wrote their correspondent. “He stumbled out
of the dock almost in tears.”
The public gallery was in chaos. Two young girls clung to
each other, weeping. Looking down at the broken figure of Jagger being led to
the cells, one of them cried out, “They’re only jailing him because he has long
hair.”
No comments:
Post a Comment