The spot fixing trial is nearing it’s conclusion. It’s been interesting to watch as the defence lawyers a) tried to explain away some fairly damming evidence and b) turned on each other in so doing. Asif has accused Butt of swearing at him to try to coax an unwitting no-ball and Butt has accused Asif (and Amir) of organising their own fixes without his knowledge. I’ve been trying to decide which one seems less likely. It’s a tough call, neither sound overly plausible. For Asif not to have been involved Butt would have to be confident that a man with over a hundred Test wickets couldn’t add an extra yard of pace without overstepping. For Butt not to have been involved someone must have been exceptionally confident that Asif would bowl a long spell. (Which is what Asif’s barrister has argued.) One or both of them is clearly lying and the simplest explanation is that they’re both lying.
The judge in the case, Justice Cooke, has instructed the jury to assume the guilt of Majeed and Amir which all parties agree is the case. I can’t see how this could be a good thing for either Butt or Asif though. Especially for Butt; if it is given that there was fixing and that his agent was involved, then… The only thing Asif has in his favour is that none of the marked money was found in his hotel room, but that’s hardly conclusive.
I can’t see how either of them could be found Not Guilty. The notion that Asif could have bowled his no-ball at the right time, but without knowing what he was doing is laughable. The notion that Amir, Asif and Butt’s agent could all have been involved in fixing without Butt’s knowledge is more likely, but it’s still decidedly far fetched. The simplest and most reasonable explanation is that all four were involved.
Defensive Indifference 