This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/31/sergeant-accused-of-attempted-better-off-with-wife-alive

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Sergeant accused of attempted murder 'better off with wife alive' Sergeant in murder trial 'better off with wife alive' court hears
(about 4 hours later)
Financial agreements between an army sergeant and the wife he is accused of trying to murder would only benefit him if she was alive, a court has heard. Financial agreements between an army sergeant and the wife he is accused of trying to murder would only benefit him if she were alive, a court has heard.
Victoria Cilliers, giving evidence at the trial at Winchester crown court of Emile Cilliers, agreed that her husband was “financially incontinent” and had issues with debt.Victoria Cilliers, giving evidence at the trial at Winchester crown court of Emile Cilliers, agreed that her husband was “financially incontinent” and had issues with debt.
The 42-year-old, a freefall instructor who had carried out about 2,600 jumps, survived spiralling to earth at high speed after she cut away her main parachute and her reserve chute failed, during the jump at the Army Parachute Association in Netheravon, Wiltshire. The 42-year-old, a freefall instructor who had carried out about 2,600 jumps, survived spiralling to earth at high speed after she cut away her main parachute and her reserve chute failed, during a jump at the Army Parachute Association in Netheravon, Wiltshire.
Emile Cilliers, of the Royal Army Physical Training Corps, is accused of tampering with her hire kit, allegedly twisting the lines of the main parachute and removing the slinks from the reserve.Emile Cilliers, of the Royal Army Physical Training Corps, is accused of tampering with her hire kit, allegedly twisting the lines of the main parachute and removing the slinks from the reserve.
The jury heard that the couple both made wills and a post-nuptial agreement in 2014, several years after they married, in order to protect their children’s future. The jury heard that the couple both made wills and a post-nuptial agreement in 2014, several years after they married, to assist their children.
Elizabeth Marsh QC, defending, read out details of the couple’s post-nuptial agreement, which set out their assets and how they would be divided if they were to divorce.Elizabeth Marsh QC, defending, read out details of the couple’s post-nuptial agreement, which set out their assets and how they would be divided if they were to divorce.
Mrs Cilliers agreed with Marsh’s suggestions that her husband had not challenged the drafting of the agreement or sought to get his name on the mortgage deed. Victoria Cilliers agreed with Marsh’s suggestion that her husband had not challenged the drafting of the agreement or sought to get his name on the mortgage deed.
Marsh said: “When you proposed this, did Emile say ‘that’s outrageous’?”Marsh said: “When you proposed this, did Emile say ‘that’s outrageous’?”
Mrs Cilliers said: “No, we discussed it, he admitted that money was potentially an issue and given we anticipated being married for life, it did not appear at that point to make a difference.” Cilliers said: “No, we discussed it, he admitted that money was potentially an issue, and given we anticipated being married for life, it did not appear at that point to make a difference.”
The defence counsel asked: “He was not pushing back in any way against this decision of both of you to protect your assets from him?”The defence counsel asked: “He was not pushing back in any way against this decision of both of you to protect your assets from him?”
Mrs Cilliers replied: “No he was not.” Cilliers replied: “No he was not.”
Marsh said the defendant was helping Mrs Cilliers pay off a £45,000 loan from her brother – money she had borrowed because she could not get a mortgage – in return for a share of their home in Amesbury, Wiltshire. Marsh said the defendant was helping Cilliers, a former army physiotherapist, pay off a £45,000 loan from her brother – money she had borrowed because she could not get a mortgage – in return for a share of their home in Amesbury, Wiltshire.
She asked: “And this only subsists while you’re alive, does it not?”She asked: “And this only subsists while you’re alive, does it not?”
The former army captain replied: “Yes.” She replied: “Yes.”
“Because if you die, the house and all your savings go to the children and he is on his uppers,” Marsh said.“Because if you die, the house and all your savings go to the children and he is on his uppers,” Marsh said.
“Yes,” the physiotherapist responded. “Yes,” she responded.
The defendant had also paid for life insurance, and Mrs Cilliers told the court she believed the payout on her death would go to her husband. The defendant had paid for life insurance, and Cilliers told the court she believed the payout on her death would go to her husband.
But Marsh said the insurance policy “makes it plain” payment would go to a legal representative or executor and not necessarily a spouse. But Marsh said the insurance policy made it “plain” that payment would go to a legal representative or executor and not necessarily a spouse.
She said: “So if Emile had died during currency of this policy, money would have gone to his estate. She said: “So if Emile had died during currency of this policy, money would have gone to his estate. Similarly, if you died the money would not go to your husband, it would go to your estate, did you know that?”
“Similarly, if you died the money would not go to to your husband, it would go to your estate, did you know that?” Cilliers replied no, adding: “I assumed wrongly it was most likely it went to him. I cannot recall a conversation with my solicitor, I think because I thought it went to Emile, I left the house to the children [in the will] knowing he would get the life insurance money.”
Mrs Cilliers replied “no”, adding: “I assumed wrongly it was most likely it went to him.
“I cannot recall a conversation with my solicitor, I think because I thought it went to Emile, I left the house to the children [in the will] knowing he would get the life insurance money.”
Marsh asked: “Does it come to this, putting the insurance money aside, Emile would have been better off with you alive than you dead, wouldn’t he?”Marsh asked: “Does it come to this, putting the insurance money aside, Emile would have been better off with you alive than you dead, wouldn’t he?”
“Yes,” the witness replied.“Yes,” the witness replied.
Mr Cilliers, 37, denies two counts of attempted murder and a third charge of damaging a gas valve, recklessly endangering life. Emile Cilliers, 37, denies two counts of attempted murder and a third charge of damaging a gas valve, recklessly endangering life.
Marsh questioned Mrs Cilliers over her recollection of the jump on Easter Sunday, 5 April 2015. Marsh questioned Victoria Cilliers over her recollection of the jump on Easter Sunday, 5 April 2015. She said: “Today, forget what anybody else has told you, today what do you say happened when you went up in that plane?”
She said: “Today, forget what anybody else has told you, today what do you say happened when you went up in that plane?” Cilliers said: “I wanted to get straight out of that plane. I did not talk to anyone, I was quite tired and emotional by that point. I just put my goggles and my helmet on and put my head down. The jump master decide to do three passes, I may have been nominated for the last pass, I can’t remember.
Mrs Cilliers said: “I wanted to get straight out of that plane. I did not talk to anyone, I was quite tired and emotional by that point. “I remember the pilot giving me a smile as I went out. Usually that’s the part that I love, the cold rush, the smell. And it just did not hit me. I pulled the parachute, immediately it was not right – there was a lot of twists. I got rid of the twists and was just completely ‘no’, it did not feel right.
“I just put my goggles and my helmet on and put my head down. The jump master decide to do three passes, I may have been nominated for the last pass, I can’t remember.
“I remember the pilot giving me a smile as I went out. Usually that’s the part that I love, the cold rush, the smell. And it just did not hit me.
“I pulled the parachute, immediately it was not right – there was a lot of twists. I got rid of the twists and was just completely ‘no’, it did not feel right.
“I do not really understand my thought process at the time. I did not want to be there and I did not want to be under the parachute.”“I do not really understand my thought process at the time. I did not want to be there and I did not want to be under the parachute.”
She said she decided to cut the main parachute away, but on deploying the reserve, knew that, too, was not right. She said she decided to cut the main parachute away, but on deploying the reserve knew that, too, was not right.
“Immediately the world went a little bit pear-shaped – the spin was going one way and the twists were the opposite way,” she said. “Immediately the world went a little bit pear-shaped – the spin was going one way and the twists were the opposite way,” she said. “It took quite a while to get that initial purchase. I expected everything to settle down when I got rid of the twists but it did not – it got worse. I could not figure how to slow it down, it was just getting faster and faster and faster. The speed was unreal of the spin and there was just a big almost bang and black.”
“It took quite a while to get that initial purchase. I expected everything to settle down when I got rid of the twists but it did not – it got worse. She said she recalled opening her eyes in the field where she landed and seeing her friend looking over her, before blacking out again and coming round in the helicopter that took her to hospital.
“I could not figure how to slow it down – it was just getting faster and faster and faster. The speed was unreal of the spin and there was just a big almost bang and black.” Under cross-examination she also told the jury she did not recall making any comment to her husband after he had taken the parachute to the toilet with him in the hangar the day before the jump, nor after seeing him with his packing paddle, described as being like a “long ruler”.
Mrs Cilliers said she recalled opening her eyes in the field where she landed and seeing her friend looking over her, before blacking out again and coming round in the helicopter that took her to hospital. Cilliers was asked about previous comments she had made about “threatening suicide”.
Under cross-examination, she also told the jury she did not recall making any comment to her husband after he had taken the parachute to the toilet with him in the hangar the day before the jump, nor seeing him with his packing paddle – described as being like a “long ruler”.
Mrs Cilliers was asked about previous comments she had made about “threatening suicide”.
Speaking about her emotions on the day of the jump, Marsh said: “How were you feeling on this day?”Speaking about her emotions on the day of the jump, Marsh said: “How were you feeling on this day?”
Mrs Cilliers replied: “Very emotional, upset. Not suicidal.” She replied: “Very emotional, upset. Not suicidal.”
Marsh then asked: “Did you do anything either accidentally or intentionally to manipulate your parachute?”Marsh then asked: “Did you do anything either accidentally or intentionally to manipulate your parachute?”
“No,” the witness answered. “No,” she answered.
The trial continues.The trial continues.