“I admit I didn’t phone the fire brigade because when I first saw it I was in total shock. Even if we had phoned the fire brigade as soon as we saw the fire there was no way Adam could have been saved. There was nothing we could do. When I first thought about calling the fire brigade, I heard they were on there way. We do not stand there watching even for 5 minutes. It happened very quick. I don’t believe it was 6.56. There is no way we stood watching that fire for 16 minutes. If it was 6.56 then it means all our times are wrong.”
“Q. What did you think would happen if, if brothers and sister and mother were upstairs asleep and somebody poured paraffin all over the floor and set fire to it. What do you think the consequences would be? A. They’d get burnt. Q. Anything else? A. No. Q. They’d just get burnt? What else might happen? A. They might burn to death. Q. So you can, can you see Matthew that by setting the hallway alight with white spirits. A. No I didn’t Q. and that they were asleep upstairs it was sort of virtually certain that they would die A. I didn’t do it Q. Did you hear what I said? A. Yes Q. Can you see that Matthew do you accept that if you’re setting the hallway alight A. I didn’t do it Q. with the white spirit? A. No Q, and these are upstairs asleep it’s virtually certain that people the occupants upstairs are going to die? A. If I did it yes, but I didn’t do it. … Q. And what you just said to Tony is yes you understand that the consequences of setting a house on fire is that they’d get burnt and they might burn to death? A. Yes Q. You’ve agreed that by setting a hallway on fire A. No I didn’t say I did it Q. No I am not saying that, I am saying that by setting a hallway on fire with people upstairs asleep its virtually certain that people are going to burn or burn to death you can see that? A. Yes … Q. But you can see how dangerous it is, because deaths will occur when people are asleep in houses, fast asleep like your brothers were, like Carys was, that setting the hallway on fire with something so flammable like turps and shutting the door and not raising the alarm is virtually certain someone is going to die? A. But I didn’t do it Q. But you can see that? A. Yes … Q. Matthew, is fire dangerous? A. Yes Q. Can it harm a human being? A. Yes Q. What else is given off when you light a fire? A. Smoke, heat, light Q. So would lighting a fire then in a house in the hallway with people upstairs asleep is that dangerous? A. Yes Q. It’s dangerous from what the fire and smoke? A. Both Q. Both, so Matthew you can see that setting fire to your house with everyone upstairs asleep would cause really serious harm to them? A. But I didn’t do it and yeah it would Q. You didn’t do it but you accept that it would? A. Yes Q. What do serious harm to them? A. Yes.”
“[Matthew] has, on the report before me, a low/average IQ and Mr Watson had indicated to me the considerable difficulties faced by his legal team in obtaining instructions, and as to the defendant’s inability to concentrate which would require a reduction in normal sitting hours and regular breaks. By agreement, the jury were therefore told by me at the outset, in explaining the adaptations and the need for regular breaks, that the defendant has a number of disadvantages which relate to his level of IQ, his reading ability and his ability to concentrate for long periods of time, all of which may affect his ability to participate effectively in his trial and which mandated the special measures which were described to them.”
“Intent is not necessarily the same as desire. If Matthew wanted to cause death or serious harm, that would be intent. ... Even if he did not, he may still have intended either result if he foresaw that death or serious harm were virtually certain. But if you are not sure when you are considering all the evidence that Matthew wanted to cause death or serious harm, you are not entitled to find that he did intend to kill or cause serious harm unless you are sure that death or serious harm was a virtual certainty, barring some unforeseen intervention, as a result of Matthew’s actions in setting the fire, and also that Matthew himself appreciated that death or serious harm was a virtual certainty. As you know, the Crown rely in particular in this respect on answers that Matthew gave in his eleventh interview at exhibit number 132 in suggesting that Matthew did appreciate that, and I shall be reminding you about that evidence later on.”
“You have in a separate bundle, I know, all the interviews that were conducted with Matthew and I told you when I began this summing-up on Friday that I wasn’t going to take time in this summing-up to go through them all again with you now. They were referred to in great detail by counsel when they were giving their closing speeches to you and I know that you will read them carefully when you retire to consider the evidence in the case. I ask you to read with particular care the answers that Matthew gave in exhibit 132, one of the final interviews in the case, having regard to Matthew’s answers given in that interview to questions as to what he knew about the consequences of anybody taking action in this house to set a fire in this way, because, as you know, when you come to consider all the evidence and apply the directions I gave you, you have to set about deciding the question of intent, and the prosecution rely in particular on the answers Matthew gave to those questions in his interview about what he foresaw of consequences.”