Filed for the Defendant

First statement of David Wood

Dated 28 Dec 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION

CLAIM NO HQ10D04125

NIGEL FRANK GIFFORD Claimant And STEPHEN SLATER Defendant

STATEMENT OF David Wood

1. My name is David Wood. My address is Cornish Parachute Club

Perranporth Airfield, Higher Trevellas. St Agnes, Cornwall TR5 OXS

2. I was a Warrant Officer serving in the Royal Air Force for 32 years

Most of my career was spent instructing parachuting activities all over

the world. For the last few years I have been the owner and Chief Club

Instructor at Cornish Parachute Club

3. In 2007, Nigel Gifford contracted me to run an operation that he called

‘Everest Skydive’. This involved skydiving from the height of Everest

and landing at a place called Syangboche Airstrip, about 18 miles from

Everest.

4. My duties were to arrange the parachuting operation, which included

each client’s parachutes and the fitting of their oxygen systems, and

also to liaise with the pilot of the plane during each lift to altitude. After

a clear drop command I would observe the parachutist until they

landed.

5. It became rapidly obvious that the client side of the operation was

badly organised, as there were people with no accommodation, some

were unwell and a few were blaming the staff. Mr Gifford was

unavailable to resolve their complaints as he was still in Kathmandu.

6. When he did arrive there was almost a lynch mob demanding either

refunds, or explanations as to why the services advertised on the

Everest brochure were not in place. The list of complaints was long.

7. None of this was any of my responsibility and it certainly made life

stressful. On more than one occasion I considered walking away from

the shambles that was unfolding. If I had walked away no one would

have jumped, so in the interests of the customers I decided to see it

through.

8. Initially the parachuting side of the operation went very well, but during

one jump an American lady, Carrie Holmes, unfortunately became

disorientated in some low cloud, and landed on a rocky hillside

breaking her ankle.

9. Our UK doctor found her, stabilised her, and brought her down on

stretcher to the drop zone. The rescue party attempted to load her into

a helicopter but the stretcher would not fit. The concerns regarding the

helicopter evacuation had been discussed on a number of occasions

between members of staff and Mr Gifford.

10. It became immediately obvious that no plans had been thought through

prior to the expedition. I stress this because on our reconnaissance trip

in May we had specifically raised this point with Mr Gifford. Mr Gifford

was in charge of logistics, which he constantly reminded the staff. This

included being in charge of the helicopters for evacuation.

11. The only option was to load the stretcher and Carrie into the Pilatus

Porter aircraft and fly her to Kathmandu Hospital. She was

accompanied by Dr Ryan Jackson.

12. A few days later, staff member Lucie Fenton asked me the following

question, “Nigel has told Carrie’s insurance company that the rescue

bill will be $50,000 – is that acceptable?” I told her, “No way – I can’t

speak for the cost of the doctor or his hotel bill in Kathmandu but the

cost of the Pilatus Porter would be $1500 per hour including fuel. The

flight from Syangboche to Kathmandu is 50 minutes each way so

$3000 would cover it. Even five star Hotels in Kathmandu are only

$100 per night”. The $50,000 claim could not be justified, and should

have been at the very most $5,000 to cover any costs.

13. The next issue that Mr Gifford presented was the case of the client Mr

Ralf Taner, who had only just over 60 jumps. From the outset I had set

the minimum jump number for a solo jumper as 200 jumps. The reason

for this was that the drop zone was acceptable in normal

circumstances but if an ‘out’ landing became necessary then

experience in jump numbers would be an advantage.

14. I told Mr Gifford that there was no way Mr Taner could jump. Mr Gifford

had accepted a non-refundable deposit followed by the full fee in the

full knowledge of these facts. So Mr Gifford had taken this money

knowing that I would not allow him to jump as a solo jumper. Mr Taner

wanted to do a solo jump and not a Tandem, however safety is an

issue on which I will not compromise and so I stood my ground.

Therefore Mr Taner did not jump.

Filed for the Defendant

First statement of Ian Bishop

Dated 26 Dec 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION

CLAIM NO HQ10D04125

NIGEL FRANK GIFFORD Claimant And STEPHEN SLATER Defendant

STATEMENT OF Ian Bishop

1. My name is Ian Bishop. My address is Heaven's Gate, 860 Gloucester Ave

Hydeaway Bay Qld 4800 Australia. I make this statement on behalf of the

Defendant, Stephen Slater. I am prepared to attend Court to give evidence in

this matter if necessary, although I hope my witness statement will suffice.

Alternatively I would be prepared to give evidence via video link

2. I have known Nigel Frank Gifford since 1982, when I met him at Dunkeswell

Airfield. He was taking a basic parachute course. At the time he was running

a moderately successful business selling padded bags to protect cameras.

3. Some time in the early 1990’s he sold the business and started up a trekking

business, which I believe went bankrupt.

4. He then started a business advice company that also failed, though I am not

sure of the sequence of events here.

5. In or around 2003 he started another trekking business called Inside Edge (

Total Expeditions) Ltd T/A High & Wild. After it had been running for a couple

of years he asked me to invest in this business because he was under

capitalised and needed money for marketing. To help him out in January 2006

I gave him GBP 25,000 for 20% of the company.

6. For some reason despite forecasts of near future profits, the business kept

needing more money and he asked me for GBP 10,000 in May 2006 which I

loaned to the company, followed by a further GBP 30,000 in June 2006, a

further GBP 40,000 in September 2006 and another GBP 25,000 in

November 2006, then another GBP 50,000 in August 2007.

7. At this point I was naturally getting very concerned that money was

disappearing down a “big black hole” somewhere, as all forecasts he gave me

said the company would be making money in the near future. I put in the latter

GBP 50,000 on the understanding that I would have total financial control. He

readily agreed to this, saying that he realised he did not have whatever was

necessary to make a business work and welcomed my financial control.

Unfortunately he did not keep to his word, and everything I asked him to do or

not do he agreed to verbally but did not actually do.

8. By this time I was living in Australia and it was difficult to keep any form of eye

on the operation. He needed another GBP 35,000 in November 2007 and

finally another GBP 40,000 when we were in Kathmandu in September 2008,

totalling GBP 255,000. I did get back GBP 40,000 in early September 2008

but Nigel was desperate for cash again in late September 2008 so I put the

above GBP 40,000 back in.

9. The accounts in my opinion never reflected the true financial position of the

company or clearly how much money I had put in, which bothered me

considerably but I knew I could prove my input from my bank if needed. They

managed to “jiggle” the figures by moving forwards deposits as “work in

progress” or some similar dubious scheme of which I did not approve. This

made the company look more viable that it was but I assumed was “legal” and

as Nigel had majority control I could do very little.

10. Having known Nigel as a friend for so many years I trusted him implicitly and it

took me a long time to wake up to the fact that all of his forecasts were wildly

out and he was not doing what I was asking him to do, but he is a great talker

and always had a “reasonable explanation.”

11. In 1991 I had first visited the Himalayas and Everest on Leo Dickinson’s

Ballooning Expedition. Amongst other things, we were looking for places to

land a parachute in the event of a balloon malfunction, so I was familiar with

the area.

12. In the summer of 2007 when I was with Nigel and a mutual friend Raymond

Marks we were talking about a one off parachute jump near Everest. I

suggested Nigel look into the idea of a commercial venture allowing paying

tandem clients and solo parachutists to jump within sight of Everest, landing

either above Namche Bazaar or near Gorak Shep. Subsequently he always

claimed it was his idea but this did not unduly concern me.

13. He estimated we could charge GBP 3,500 to clients and make a profit if they

got themselves to Kathmandu, so I asked him to look further into my

suggestion of this potential new string to High and Wild’s bow, although by

now I was aware that he usually underestimated the costs and so I was not

surprised when he re-evaluated them to GBP 5,000. Eventually we needed to

charge approximately GBP 15,000 to make a profit.

14. Every time I asked him for cash flow or profit forecasts they turned out to be

more than wrong. They were obviously misleading, with many debts not listed

etc.

15. One of the savings I suggested was that a reconnaissance trip was not

necessary as it was estimated to cost GBP 8,000 and Nigel agreed to drop it.

Next time I phoned him he admitted he was actually in Kathmandu on the

reconnaissance trip saying that he needed to do it “on safety grounds.” It later

came out that he had spent well over GBP 20,000 and proved nothing. Nigel

had secretly picked a team of parachuting experts for this reconnaissance:

Dave & Ben Wood, Andy Montriou, and skydiving cameraman Leo Dickinson.

16. Shortly after the team returned to the UK I was disappointed to hear that Andy

Montriou & Leo Dickinson had been fired from the project. After spending so

much money it was a shame to dispose of the staff that had become familiar

with the project and its location. I do not know why they were fired but they

apparently had written two reports highlighting the lack of safety and the

misleading marketing description, especially referring to the distance of

Everest from the actual skydive location. 18 miles is not “in front of Everest,”

Everest was nowhere near to the proposed drop zone but Nigel persisted in

giving the impression that the project would drop clients either over Everest or

at least alongside it. I tried to get Nigel to be honest about the distance the

landing site was from Everest, but again although agreeing verbally he never

changed the misleading marketing material.

17. By October Nigel had approximately thirty clients and a dozen “observers” as

well as two TV crews. Because Nigel never appeared to keep any credible

accounts I have no idea how much we took in, but based on the deposits and

an asking price of GBP 15,000 for parachutists and GBP 4,500 for

‘observers’, the figure must have been close to GBP 500,000.

18. The first major problem was that Nigel had done almost no planning for

accommodation for these rich clients and they had nowhere to sleep. I

personally toured the local villages and found some accommodation for them,

albeit not to the high standard they had been led to believe. Nigel for some

reason had to stay in Kathmandu away from the problems he had created.

19. It wasn’t long before the clients complained, and at one stage it looked as if

everyone was intent on suing or lynching him. They were very angry and it

could all have so easily been avoided if he had been honest with everyone.

20. The next problem seemed to be that Nigel had a “two-tier” system of clients.

Despite all paying the same amount of money, I believe they all expected to

be staying in the luxurious Everest View Hotel, where there was nowhere near

enough rooms for them. Even though I had bankrolled the start up of the

enterprise I slept in a meagre Sherpa hut, as indeed did some of the

millionaire clients.

21. Another problem that soon surfaced was that Nigel had apparently promised

all of the staff that they could have their own rooms in the Panorama hotel,

which excluded the guests from the only other vaguely acceptable hotel in the

area. Nigel denied to me that he had promised the staff this facility, but one of

them showed me his contract clearly stating this.

22. If Nigel had oversold the closeness of Everest, it was nothing compared to

what he had promised his clients. Many of them were under the impression

that they would be the “very first to skydive Everest” and thus be in the record

books. This caused a considerable problem with several clients, as Ron

Hudson highlighted so eloquently in the YouTube video.

23. So not putting too fine a word on it, Nigel was guilty of fraud. How could so

many be first? It was nonsense.

24. Then despite the initial reports of Andy Montriou, and backed up by Ben

Wood, attention to safety procedures appeared to have been omitted from

Nigel’s agenda (See the YouTube clip related to the Carrie Holmes accident).

25. I have been involved in many adventure activities, it has been the love of my

life, but this trip was awful. Clients and staff had been lied to by Nigel. I felt

terrible for being associated with him and trying to sort out the mess he had

got the project into, however most people did do their jump with only one

serious injury.

26. Back in the UK the staff were not being paid so I paid them directly from my

personal bank account into theirs, so that the money could not “disappear”.

27. After an adventure such as this it is important to capitalise on the publicity to

attract future clients, but Nigel decided to spend another month in the

Himalayas with his wife and child. Another problem I could not understand at

the time was that Nigel kept failing to contact an extremely good lead I had

discovered from the existing clients. I now believe it was because all along he

had planned to shut down High and Wild to escape his debts and to start

again under another name (as he had done before), then pick up on the

existing and the new contacts.

28. There was worse to come. I realised that some of the staff in Nepal had not

been paid. I personally ensured another friend who was responsible for

oxygen advice, Andy Elson was paid, I think it was GBP 8,000. Nigel

apparently also did not pay the owners of the aeroplane from Switzerland all

of their money and perhaps the most criminal of all, Nigel’s Nepalese partner

Suman Pandey was left with a huge bill, reputedly GBP 120,000 for hotels,

helicopters and in country logistics. All of these debts after the money I had

put in, plus the approximately half a million GB pounds paid by clients did not

add up.

29. Nigel then put Inside Edge (Total Expeditions) Ltd T/A High & Wild into

“Voluntary Liquidation.” This meant that he walked away without paying many

debts and was free to repeat the operation the following year, which he

attempted. I asked the liquidators to see the accounts, being the largest

creditor and a 20% company shareholder, but was told I was not allowed to

see them, so I asked Nigel and he also refused to show them to me.

30. For some reason in the liquidators report they state that I was owed GBP

180,000, which is less than the true debt, and could be proved by bank

statements. I contacted the liquidators over this but they ignored my

correspondence.

31. What I also do not understand is that how he, as a bankrupt, is funding a High

Court Libel case against Stephen Slater for blowing the whistle on his

exploits.

32. For someone whose company went into liquidation and who personally was

declared bankrupt only last June, I have two questions. “Where on earth is he

getting the money from? And “Is this money legal?”

Statement of truth: I believe the contents of this statement to be true Signed Ian Bishop Date 26.12.10 ______________________ ________________

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! "#$%&!'()!*+%!,%'%-&.-*!

"#)/*!0*.*%1%-*!('!2$.-!3.$*(-!

,.*%&!4*+!5.-6.)7!89::!

!

!

;<!=>?!>;@>!ABCD=!B"!5C0=;A?!! ! ! ! ! AE2;F!<B!

GC??<0!HD2<A>!,;I;0;B<! ! ! ! ! ! >G:9,9J:8K!

!

!

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<;@?E!@;""BD,! ! AE2;F2<=!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2-&!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!0=?L>?<!0E2=?D! ! ,?"?<,2<=!

!

!

!

0=2=?F?<=!B"!

2E2<!32E=B<!

!

!

!

:M F7!-.1%!#/!2$.-!3.$*(-M!!F7!.&&)%//!#/!::!H%.N+/#&%!A(11(-O!3%/*P()*O!A(--%N*#N6*!9Q449O!

C02M!!;!1.R%!*+#/!/*.*%1%-*!(-!S%+.$'!('!,%'%-&.-*O!0*%P+%-!0$.*%)M!!;!.1!P)%P.)%&!*(!.**%-&!

A(6)*!*(!T#U%!%U#&%-N%!#-!*+#/!1.**%)!#'!-%N%//.)7O!.$*+(6T+!;!+(P%!*+.*!17!V#*-%//!/*.*%1%-*!

V#$$!/6''#N%M!!2$*%)-.*#U%$7O!;!V(6$&!S%!P)%P.)%&!*(!T#U%!%U#&%-N%!U#.!U#&%(!$#-RM!

!

8M ;-!5.-6.)7!8994!;!V./!N(-*.N*%&!S7!<#T%$!@#''()&!')(1!?-T$.-&!.S(6*!.!/R7&#U%!

*+.*!+%!V./!()T.-#W#-TM!!>%!*($&!1%!*+.*!+%!V./!.V.)%!*+.*!;!V./!(-%!('!*+%!'%V!P)#U.*%!N#*#W%-/!

*+.*!+.&!N(1P$%*%&!.!X9O999!'*!*.-&%1!/R7&#U%!.-&!#'!;!V(6$&!/#T-!6P!'()!+#/!%YP%&#*#(-!*+#/!

V(6$&!P)(S.S$7!#-&6N%!(*+%)! /R7&#U%)/Z!*(![(#-!

*+%!*%.1!/#-N%!+%!-%%&%&!8K!P%(P$%!*(!P.)*#N#P.*%!*(!1.R%!*+#/!.&U%-*6)%!.!'#-.-N#.$!/6NN%//M!

!

XM >%!*($&!1%!*+.*!+%!+.&!N$#1S%&!F*M!?U%)%/*!*V#N%!.-&!V./!.-!%YP%)#%-N%&!/R7&#U%)O!*+%!

#1P$#N.*#(-!S%#-T!*+.*!*+#/!V(6$&!S%!.!V%$$!()T.-#W%&!*)#PM!

!

JM ;!*($&!+#1!*+.*!.*!!\8!;!1#T+*!S%!#-*%)%/*%&!#-!*+%!/R7&#U%O!S6*!V./!&%'#-#*%$7!-(*!#-*%)%/*%&!#-!

*)%RR#-T!()!+#R#-T!#-!<%P.$!()!*+%!>#1.$.7./M!

!

KM >%!/6S/%]6%-*$7!#-'()1%&!1%!*+.*!;!V(6$&!+.U%!.!+%$#N(P*%)!*(!N(U%)!*+%!

*)#PO!V+#N+!V./!S./#N.$$7!*)6%M!

!

QM ;!*($&!+#1!*+.*!#'!;!1.&%!*+%!*)#P!#*!V(6$&!S%!V#*+!17!/(-!.-&!*+.*!V%!V%)%!(-!.!U%)7!*#T+*!

/N+%&6$%!V+#N+!N(6$&!-(*!S%!%Y*%-&%&M!!>%!N(11%-*%&!*+.*!*+%!V%.*+%)!(U%)!?U%)%/*!V./!

T%-%).$$7!N$%.)!.*!*+.*!*#1%!('!*+%!7%.)!.-&O!#-!.-7!N./%O!;!V(6$&!S%!*+%!'#)/*!

.-&!/N+%&6$#-T!/+(6$&!S%!-(!P)(S$%1M!

!

!" #$%&'%()%*$)+$,-.$)+$/0)1203*45$647-0$03*$)1%3$1%-8(+')%9$)+$)1%$*9+'$:+3%5$;'%3*$)<+$+9$)19%%$*0.;$)1%9%$5$*%'%3*83=$+3$<%0)1%9$(+3*8)8+3;5$*+$)1%$;7.*8>%$03*$)1%3$9%)493$)+$)1%$?)0)%;"$$

@" A+$2.$;49'98;%5$#$9%(%8>%*$0$)<+$<%%7$8)83%909.$)10)$<0;$B0;8(0--.$0$)9%7783=$)98'$83$C%'0-$<8)1$)1%$D42'$0)$)1%$%3*"$$$$

E" F,)%9$%&)%3;8>%$(+22438(0)8+35$)18;$<0;$9%*4(%*$)+$0B+4)$0$<%%7"$$#$<0;$)+-*$)10)$)1%9%$<+4-*$B%$0)$-%0;)$)<+$G8-0)4;$089(90,)$+'%90)83=$,9+2$)1%$*9+'$:+3%$)10)$<+4-*$(099.$4'$)+$)%3$'0;;%3=%9;$%0(1$03*$)1%9%,+9%$;(1%*4-83=$<+4-*$3+)$B%$0$'9+B-%2"$$$H+<%>%95$<1%3$<%$0998>%*$)1%9%$<0;$0$I4;;803$1%-8(+')%95$<18(1$-%,)$822%*80)%-.$03*$+3%$G8-0)4;$089(90,)$<18(1$(+4-*$(099.$,+49$'0;;%3=%9;5$;1+<%*$4'$)1%$3%&)$*0.$03*$8)$<0;$0-9%0*.$%>8*%3)$)10)$)1%$+9=038:0)8+3$<0;$0$*8;0;)%9"$$

JK" L>%3)40--.5$0$D42'$-8;)$<0;$'9+*4(%*$)10)$;1+<%*$#$<+4-*$B%$+3$)1%$)189)%%3)1$)98'$<18(15$0;$8)$10''%3;5$<+4-*$10>%$)07%3$0$2+3)1$)+$(+2'-%)%"$$

JJ" M%;'8)%$B0*$<%0)1%95$2.$;+3$03*$#$09=4%*$)10)$<%$<%9%$3+)$=%))83=$<10)$<0;$'9+28;%*$+9$'08*$,+9"$$N49)1%92+9%5$*%;'8)%$'9+28;%;$)+$)1%$(+3)909.5$)1%9%$<%9%$3+$0>08-0B-%$,-8=1);$,9+2$/0)1203*4$)+$9%)493$1+2%$%>%3$8,$<%$(+4-*$10>%$;)0.%*"$$

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

JZ" #$10>%$+B;%9>%*$)1%$2+>8%$?(02*8>%$L>%9%;)$V1))'[\\<<<".+4)4B%"(+2\<0)(1]>^_N2`_a6UN*S$W$03*$0=9%%$<8)1$%>%9.$<+9*$03*$;%3)82%3)$V<8)1$)1%$(0>%0)$)10)$#$<0;$3+)$'9%;%3)$,+9$;+2%$+,$)1%$83)%9>8%<;W5$B4)$,+9$X8,,+9*$)+$)07%$0()8+3$0=083;)$0$.+43=$,8-2207%9$83$03$%,,+9)$)+$;4''9%;;$)1%$)94)1$8;$;(03*0-+4;"$

$$?)0)%2%3)$+,$A94)1"$

$F-03$X"$Y0-)+35$G1"M"5$M"?("$U1089203$$b&,+9*$T8+;(8%3(%$U+9'"$L2%98)4;$G9+,%;;+9$U0;%$Y%;)%93$I%;%9>%$S38>%9;8).$$$$$$$$$

!

Filed for the Defendant

First statement of Andrew Montriou

Dated 30 Dec 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION

CLAIM NO HQ10D04125

NIGEL FRANK GIFFORD Claimant And STEPHEN SLATER Defendant

STATEMENT OF ANDREW MONTRIOU

1. My name is Andrew Montriou

2. My address is 18, Manleys Lane, Dunkeswell, Honiton, Devon, EX14

4XQ

3. I make this statement in support of Stephen Slater’s defence in the

above matter.

4. I am prepared to attend court to testify.

5. I am a parachuting and skydiving instructor holding all of the British

Parachute Association instructional ratings including that of Instructor

Examiner. I have been the Chief Instructor responsible for all flying and

parachuting operations at two UK clubs for a period of 6 years. I am a

United States Parachute Association instructor and Safety and Training

Advisor.

6. I first met Nigel Gifford around the early 1990’s as a casual

acquaintance at the skydiving centre in Dunkeswell.

7. My first dealings with Mr Gifford were some time around the year 2000,

when he asked if I would inspect and repack the reserve on two of his

sets of personal parachute equipment (this is a requirement every 6

months, similar to an annual MOT inspection on a car). This I did, at

the agreed price of £30 each, however I was not paid. I met with Mr

Gifford on perhaps two or three occasions subsequently, but each time

I asked for the money I was fobbed off with a ‘Don’t have any cash on

me at the moment, I’ll give it to you next time I see you’ type of answer.

8. I was contacted by telephone at home in late 2007 by Mr Gifford. I

reminded him of the debt and again he skirted around the issue. What

he went on to say in the conversation was that he was organising what

he was calling ‘Everest Skydive’ and would like me to be the Chief

Tandem Instructor.

9. Over the course of a number of subsequent conversations, Mr Gifford

outlined his plan and the part I was expected to play in it. The essential

detail was that I would assist as required in all the preparations

including taking part in a reconnaissance trip and reporting on the

findings. The agreement as to remuneration for this work was that I

would be paid £1,000 per tandem jump that I did, but this fee would

include the work prior to the main trip, including a “recce” of the drop

zone in Nepal. Mr Gifford indicated to me at this time that my expected

gross earnings would be in the region of £20,000 to £30,000 on the first

trip, with it subsequently becoming an annual or twice yearly event for

which I would be employed.

10. During the run up to the “recce” I became uncomfortable with the way

that Mr Gifford wanted to operate the trip. He was trying to cut costs at

every opportunity, with scant regard for safety. An example of this was

his desire to have the parachute equipment copied in Nepal by

unqualified personnel to save money.

11. I became increasingly uncomfortable with the manner in which Mr

Gifford handled matters of safety. In particular I remember a discussion

about the complexities of a drop zone/landing area at 12,500 ft, and a

jump from 29,500 ft with regard to acclimatisation and hypoxia issues. I

clearly remember Mr Gifford saying “I can assure you that once

acclimatised to the DZ, going 17,000’ feet above it is just like going to

17,000 ft above sea level.” It is most certainly not, and to treat it as

such is a dangerous, life threatening error with potentially fatal

consequences.

12. On the “recce” trip itself I became concerned that my name was being

used so heavily in the promotion of the project, and I was beginning to

have grave concerns over the ability of Gifford to deliver what he was

promising in the marketing material. My concern was the effect on my

reputation of being part of the management team.

13. I was concerned with marketing material which promised an adventure

“being in freefall and looking down on the summit of Everest.” This is

akin to the statement “being on the top of the roof of the Royal Courts

of Justice and looking down on the runway at Gatwick Airport.’

14. As I became better acquainted with Mr Gifford over the course of the

“recce” trip I soon formed the opinion that he was almost incapable of

being honest about any subject. One day during the trek to the drop

zone we all caught a glimpse of a mountain top through a gap in the

cloud. Mr Gifford assured us we were looking at the summit of Everest.

I questioned that, having been a reader of books on the Himalaya for

more than 20 years and not recognising the distinctive profile. Leo

Dickinson agreed with me, he having ballooned over Everest. Later the

weather cleared and we realised it would certainly not have been

possible to see Everest from where we were.

15. Similarly at one point on the trek Leo asked if there were any good

Rhododendron groves further ahead on the trek. Mr Gifford assured us

that they did not grow at these altitudes. They were growing in

profusion several thousand feet higher, at which point Mr Gifford

bizarrely denied that he had made this assertion, even though this

simply made him look even more stupid. I recall these points among

many others as showing that while Mr Gifford liked to give the

impression of having a full knowledge of everything about which he

spoke, the reality was quite different.

16. Whilst on the “recce” trek I made the point that paying clients would

likely be unhappy with the level of accommodation that we were

staying in. Mr Gifford always replied “but this is Nepal” despite much

higher quality accommodation clearly being available.

17. I and all the other “recce” participants were briefed by Mr Gifford to

remain quiet while he lied to a senior officer in the Nepalese Army Air

Corps in order to obtain agreement to use one of their helicopters.

18. When on the “recce” we came to the jumps themselves, and despite

being briefed that the delay (time in freefall before opening his

parachute) was to be 3 seconds, Mr Gifford delayed for nearly 10

seconds. When questioned about it afterwards, he denied it. This

whole event was recorded on video. To me it showed the contempt Mr

Gifford held for safety.

19. On our return from the “recce” I wrote up my findings in the form of

“Everest Skydive, Report From Recce, May 2008.” which was

distributed by email to all present on the “recce”. Also I had editorial

input on a film, which was shot principally by Leo Dickinson. Mr Gifford

agreed to buy the rights to use it as promotional material. During the

agreement to buy it I clearly recall shaking hands with Mr Gifford. I am

now quite certain that he had no intention whatsoever of honouring the

agreement to pay.

20. Shortly after our return from the “recce” I received an email from Mr

Gifford essentially saying that our relationship was unworkable and

offering me £1500 for my contribution up to that point.

21. On 6th August 2008 I received a letter from Chubb Bulleid Solicitors

acting for Mr Gifford essentially saying that if I did not repudiate my

“recce” report that they would bring an action for defamation. I found

this most distressing having done nothing more than give my honest

opinions about matters of client safety and satisfaction. I very nearly

withdrew the report solely to free myself from the burden of pressure of

what sounded to me like a lengthy and expensive legal process.

22. I took some advice and resolved not to be bullied into submission by

Mr Gifford. Further enquiries revealed that Mr Gifford’s ‘modus

operandi’ was to quieten people with writs and solicitors letters,

handing them out “like confetti” in the words of one of Mr Gifford’s

former acquaintances.

23. I replied to Mr Gifford’s solicitor with a letter stating that as a starting

point any action in defamation required that the alleged defamatory

statement be untrue, and that any subsequent action would be

defended. I heard no more on the matter.

24. I began an action in the small claims court to recover the money I was

owed from the promotional film. There were a number of tactics

employed to delay the case but eventually it came to trial and was

found in my favour, despite the judge saying that it had been

“rigorously defended.”

25. Unfortunately for me Mr Gifford’s company High and Wild Ltd. was by

the time of the judgement in voluntary liquidation and I therefore

received nothing.

26. There has been a question of fraud with regard to the affairs of High

and Wild based on the following. Mr Gifford/High and Wild Ltd must

have taken around £600,000 in receipts for participants in Everest

Skydive. The company went into liquidation with a creditors’ list

totalling £540,000, most of which was unpaid staff and suppliers to the

Skydive Everest expedition. There has been no explanation as to the

shortfall of money and my suspicion is that money has been hidden

somewhere. Police are continuing to investigate this matter.

27. Ian Bishop, the other shareholder of the company High and Wild and a

major investor has also asserted that Mr Gifford acted fraudulently.

28. I understand Mr Gifford has made allegations that his former partner in

Nepal is involved in ‘child trafficking’ an allegation which needless to

say has resulted in legal action being brought against Mr Gifford in

Nepal. I make this point to illustrate the depths to which Mr Gifford is

prepared to stoop in order to further his aims.

29. I have seen the video posted on YouTube which Mr Gifford alleges is

defamatory and would comment that it shows Mr Gifford perfectly

displaying his true colours. I have also seen the response video posted

by the “Friends of Nigel Gifford.”

30. I particularly take issue with the assertion that all of the arrangements

were checked by experienced parachuting professionals, and that none

of them had any problems with the safety arrangements. I was one of

those professionals and had big problems with many areas. Sharing

my concerns were Leo Dickinson and Ben Wood amongst others.

31. As for the adequacy of the casualty evacuation, it is, in my view,

negligent beyond question to be operating a parachuting program in

such an area, particularly with people of low experience (200 jumps),

without a helicopter available to evacuate a stretcher. At the time of

writing my “recce” report I was of the understanding that a Mi17

helicopter would be on standby at the drop zone (capable of carrying

multiple stretchers). The Mi17 was subsequently not available during

the expedition as advertised, further compromising the participants’

safety.

32. I have spoken to a number of staff and participants of the ‘Everest

Skydive’ expedition, and without exception every one of them has

expressed the opinion that the video posted was a fair and accurate

portrayal of the events and feelings that took place.

33. I believe the action that he is bringing against Stephen Slater is another

example of his bully boy tactics, carefully timed to cause the maximum

difficulty in obtaining statements for the defence over the Christmas

period, and clearly hoping for some sort of default judgement because

of a poor defence.

34. I cannot help but wonder how a man who was declared bankrupt and

penniless only a few months ago is able to finance a defamation action

(costing £25,000 to date) for what is essentially a video of things that

he said and that some other people said.

Statement of truth: I believe the contents of this statement to be true Signed Andy Montriou Date 30.12.10 ________________________ ________________

To Whom it may concern

NIGEL GIFFORD : In 1978 Mr Gifford was a member of an eight man Himalayan expedition of which I was leader. The mountain we were attempting was a high and difficult one; we were not employing sherpa porters and were doing all the load carrying ourselves, a gruelling task. Mr Gifford had previous Himalayan experience but only on Army expeditions which were / are a rather different matter. After a severe storm – at a low point in the expedition - Mr Gifford decided to return home, apparently his mother was ill, and was accompanied back to Kathmandu by another member who had been injured. We eventually failed to climb the mountain and in the aftermath of the expedition there was a general feeling among the other members that Mr Gifford had not pulled his weight. As leader I had been aware of this, on mountaineering expeditions teamwork is essential, not just for success but especially for safety. Obviously personal relationships can be severely stressed and experienced climbers will often hide personal feelings to preserve the morale of the team. But I had been unaware at the time of several quite serious incidents, which came to light only at the post mortem -at which Mr Gifford was not present - and which reflected very badly on him. The expedition doctor, now a medical professor in Sydney, as well as our most powerful climber, later to become the Polish Defence Minister, were especially vociferous and there were suggestions of what the Army calls “ L M F “. Before our expedition I had recommended Mr Gifford to Michael Robinson, the MD of Explorasia, a company for whom I consulted, as a suitable – paid - guide / leader for a commercial trek to Everest Base Camp which he was planning for the following year. This was before such treks became common and leading a dozen or so inexperienced, paying clients at high altitude in remote country is a serious and very responsible business requiring, not least, considerable people skills. On our return Michael asked me if I could still recommend Mr Gifford for the task. Knowing what I then knew, in all honesty I had to say no. It was my considered opinion born of experience. A short time later Mr Gifford threatened me with action for slander or defamation. This was over thirty years ago and I cannot now recall the exact details, but I seem to recall that I received a solicitors letter which, needless to say, I ignored. Of course, as I anticipated, nothing further happened and I have had no dealings with Mr Gifford since. I gather that in the outdoor / adventure world he has a reputation of flying to law against anyone with whom he has a disagreement. John Cleare December 10th 2010 01747-820320 cleare@btinternent.com .