She paused to let this sink in. Then she looked at the three jurors left behind in the selection area. ‘Would those remaining jurors who have not been selected please leave now with the jury bailiff.’

There was a brief, expectant silence as they filed out.

Meg looked back at the defendant, who was sitting impassively, staring ahead, with a guard behind him. The dock looked like the loneliest place in the world. It was a very strange feeling being here, being a juror. This wasn’t some party game. Over the coming days – weeks – she and the other eleven randoms would be deciding on this man’s future. The charges sounded very serious, and no doubt would not have been brought without good reason, she assumed. The trafficking of the drugs particularly revulsed her. But could that mild little man really have been behind all that?

Then she thought about Harold Shipman, the harmless-looking bearded and bespectacled family doctor who was estimated to have murdered over three hundred of his patients. Appearances sure were deceptive.

Richard Jupp studied the twelve jurors in the box, privately assessing them. Eight men and four women. A few of them looked quite bright. One man looked to him like a cop – or a retired one. And the fellow in the suit with the grand name looked like a man used to being in charge. No doubt he would consider he should be the foreman.

He addressed them the way he always did, to try to put them at ease, leaning towards them with a warm, avuncular smile. ‘I’d like to welcome you all to the jury,’ he said. ‘It’s you and me who will be trying this case together. The first thing I’d like to say to you, as I see many of you have your pens out, is please do not be distracted by taking notes.’

He paused then went on. ‘Of course, some details and timelines will be significant and may be complex, but I’ll be doing a thorough summing-up at the end of the trial before you go out to consider your verdict, and you’ll have a full recap then. What is important for you as jurors is to concentrate on listening to all the arguments for and against the defence of the man standing in the dock. It is your assessment of the evidence that is crucial. Will you believe the evidence of the prosecution against this man, or the evidence of the defence? You twelve people alone will have to make that decision. I want you to arrive at your decision based on what you see and hear, on body language and on the verbal evidence. I don’t want you distracted by feeling you must write down notes – and perhaps in doing so miss something crucial.’