Barrymore ‘paid two witnesses not to give pool death evidence’
MICHAEL Barrymore bribed two witnesses not to give evidence against him following the death of a guest at his home, the High Court heard yesterday.
Detectives investigating the death of Stuart Lubbock, 31, said they received an anonymous tip that the entertainer had ‘ paid off ’ the individuals.
They also looked into Barrymore’s ‘bad character’ following previous allegations of ‘non-consensual sexual activity including rape of males and females’, the court was told.
The details emerged on the fourth day of the 65-year- old’s case against Essex Police for nearly £2.5 million of damages. He claims his 2007 arrest on the suspicion of the rape and murder six years earlier of Mr Lubbock at his mansion in
‘He was told to clear up the house’
Roydon, Essex, was unlawful and destroyed his career.
Mr Lubbock was found in the pool. He had suffered severe internal injuries indicating a sexual assault and his bloodstream contained ecstasy, cocaine and alcohol. Barrymore fled the property and was not spoken to by police until two hours later.
His then boyfriend, Jonathan Kenney, and another man, Justin Merritt, were also present when Mr Lubbock died and were also arrested in 2007. The case was later dropped against the trio.
John Beggs QC, representing Essex Police, told the court a police intelligence report recorded an anonymous source had contacted the investigating team.
The individual claimed ‘two people were paid off by Mr Barrymore not to give evidence against him’. The report also contained a tipoff alleging Kenney rang Barrymore’s personal assistant, Mike Brown, on the morning of Mr Lubbock’s death.
‘He was told to clear up the house and the police were called after this was done,’ Mr Beggs said. The barrister said Brown had ‘untrammelled’ access to the house and was ‘coming and going throughout the day’, according to a police log. Dur- ing this time, a pool thermometer which could have been used to assault Mr Lubbock ‘went missing’. Mr Beggs said past allegations about Barrymore’s behaviour were looked into and one, involving ‘voyeuristic sexual assault’, was ‘distinctly relevant’.
It was described as ‘rough sexual relations with a female being watched’. Drugs were also allegedly present. Hugh Tomlinson QC, representing Barrymore, said the allega- tion of voyeuristic sexual assault involved Barrymore paying someone to have sex with a prostitute.
He said his client was questioned but not charged by police as he was not present during the encounter because he left the room. Barrymore was cautioned for smoking cannabis, however.
Mr Beggs said there were reasonable grounds for Barrymore’s arrest based on ‘ motive, injuries and death’. The case continues.