Author Edward Abel Smith describes a profound personal and ethical conflict after discovering the criminal case of Robin Garbutt. In 2010, Garbutt was convicted of murdering his wife, Diana, in their North Yorkshire home. The prosecution's case was built on a narrative of a brutal attack and a subsequent fabricated robbery. However, Smith’s initial research into the case revealed a discrepancy: while the crime was horrific, Garbutt was portrayed by his family and local supporters as a gentle man. This contrast became even more pronounced when Smith began a series of letters and weekly phone calls with Garbutt from Wealstun Prison. During these interactions, Garbutt appeared calm, warm, and patient, even offering to answer any questions Smith had for a potential book without attempting to persuade him of his innocence.
Smith’s investigation into the conviction highlights significant systemic hurdles. He notes that the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), the body responsible for screening claims of miscarriage of justice, has repeatedly rejected Garbutt’s applications. Garbutt describes this process as a game of 'Whac-A-Mole,' where addressing one pillar of the prosecution's case leads the CCRC to dismiss the application based on another point. A key complicating factor is the reliability of the financial data used to establish a motive for the murder. The prosecution alleged Garbutt was stealing from the post office, but Smith points out that the Garbutts lived on the premises, making it nearly impossible to distinguish personal from business expenses.
Despite the evidence of the crime, Smith finds himself in a state of uneasy rapport with a man the state has labeled a murderer. He admits to a sense of 'uneasy feeling' that Garbutt’s gentle demeanor might be a calculated performance, yet he remains touched by the prisoner's interest in his life. This creates a tension between the public's expectation of social shunning for such a crime and the personal experience of treating a prisoner with dignity. Smith’s narrative underscores the difficulty of reconciling a person's humanity with their actions, especially when the legal system's mechanisms for correcting errors are slow and opaque. The central uncertainty remains whether Garbutt's calm exterior masks a psychopathic nature or if the conviction itself is a product of a flawed investigative process and unreliable data.