_:n191179dea66d4e51b1bf2b823cbd0ae9xb73
<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"Emma Rance: &#x201C;You know Mrs Reynolds&#x2019; witness statement came about because Mrs Ellis had asked her to come forward. The prosecution say Mrs Chamberlain&#x2019;s account has changed, but it seemed at one stage as if Mrs Reynolds accepted there was a conversation, but she didn&#x2019;t hear any reference to money and the call wasn&#x2019;t on loudspeaker. Interesting they should both recall this one conversation when there would often be discussions round the table on the phone. &#x201C;Mrs Chamberlain gave a lengthy account of Mr Marchant&#x2019;s financial dealings, saying there was an initial offer of &#xA3;20,000. Did that take place? That is what you will want to decide. You may want to consider this. If there was no conversation, why would she say her mother had heard it, and furthermore why would she say her friend was there? She is inviting the police to obtain witness statements from police who would say she&#x2019;s lying. Why would she do that? &#x201C;You also have to consider whether you are sure Mrs Chamberlain abused her position and whether she is lying.<br> &#x201C;You are told to be careful when considering the letter. But I say it supports her account. He is supporting her and encouraging her. It was suggested, it is alleged Mrs Chamberlain did not act in her uncle&#x2019;s best interests. The principles an attorney must follow are that you must assume a person can make their own decisions unless it is proven they can&#x2019;t.<br> &#x201C;I urge you to take into account their relationship. Mrs Chamberlain&#x2019;s relationship with her uncle. It was a close relationship. The only person, you may think, who was there for him, is her.&#x201D;"
<https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/niece-denies-defrauding-vulnerable-uncle-13974682>