Filed for the Defendant

First statement of David Wood

Dated 28 Dec 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO

QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION 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 CLAIM NO HQ10D04125

QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION

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

______________________ ________________
  
 
                  Filed  for  the  Defendant  
First  Statement  of  Alan  Walton  
Dated  8th  January  2011  
 
 
IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  JUSTICE             CLAIM  NO  
QUEENS  BRANCH  DIVISION             HQ10D04125  
 
 
 
                                           NIGEL  GIFFORD     CLAIMANT  
                                                             And  
                                         STEPHEN  SLATER     DEFENDANT  
 
 
 
STATEMENT  OF  
ALAN  WALTON  
 
 
 
1. My  name  is  Alan  Walton.    My  address  is  11  Beachside  Common,  Westport,  Connecticut  06880,  
USA.    I  make  this  statement  on  behalf  of  Defendant,  Stephen  Slater.    I  am  prepared  to  attend  
Court  to  give  evidence  in  this  matter  if  necessary,  although  I  hope  that  my  witness  statement  
will  suffice.    Alternatively,  I  would  be  prepared  to  give  evidence  via  video  link.  
 
2. In  January  2008  I  was  contacted  by  Nigel  Gifford  from  England  about  a  skydive  ͞ŽǀĞƌǀĞƌĞƐƚ͟
that  he  was  organizing.    He  told  me  that  he  was  aware  that  I  was  one  of  the  few  private  citizens  
that  had  completed  a  30,000  ft  tandem  skydive  and  if  I  would  sign  up  for  his  expedition  this  
would  probably  induce  other  ͞ŶŽŶƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂů͟;ŝ͘Ğ͘ƌĞůĂƚŝǀĞůLJŝŶĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞĚskydivers)  to  join  
the  team  since  he  needed  25  people  to  participate  to  make  this  adventure  a  financial  success.  
 
3. He  told  me  that  he  had  climbed  Mt.  Everest  twice  and  was  an  experienced  skydiver,  the  
implication  being  that  this  would  be  a  well  organized  trip.  
 
4. I  told  him  that  at    72  I  might  be  interested  in  the  skydive,  but  was  definitely  not  interested  in  
trekking  or  hiking  in  Nepal  or  the  Himalayas.  
 
5. He  subsequently  informed  me  that  I  would  have  a  helicopter  to  cover  the  ͞ƚƌĞŬŬŝŶŐ͟ƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞ
trip,  which  was  basically  true.  
 
6. I  told  him  that  if  I  made  the  trip  it  would  be  with  my  son  and  that  we  were  on  a  very  tight  
schedule  which  could  not  be  extended.    He  commented  that  the  weather  over  Everest  was  
generally  clear  at  that  time  of  the  year  and,  in  any  case,  I  would  be  the  first  ͞ƚĂŶĚĞŵ͟ũƵŵƉĞƌ
and  scheduling  should  be  no  problem.  
 
 7. I  expected  to  fly  to  Kathmandu,  Lukla  and  then  helicopter  to  the  drop  zone,  spend  two  or  three  
days  there  ,  depending  on  weather  conditions,  do  the  skydive  and  then  return  to  the  States.  
 
8. To  my  surprise,  I  received  a  two  week  itinerary  that  was  basically  a  trekking  trip  in  Nepal  with  
the  jump  at  the  end.      
 
9. After  extensive  communication,  this  was  reduced  to  about  a  week.    I  was  told  that  there  would  
be  at  least  two  Pilatus  aircraft  operating  from  the  drop  zone  that  would  carry  up  to  ten  
passengers  each  and  therefore  scheduling  would  not  be  a  problem.      However,  when  we  arrived  
there  was  a  Russian  helicopter,  which  left  immediately  and  one  Pilatus  aircraft  which  could  
carry  four  passengers,  showed  up  the  next  day  and  it  was  already  evident  that  the  organization  
was  a  disaster.  
 
10. Eventually,  a  jump  list  was  produced  that  showed  I  would  be  on  the  thirteenth  trip  which,  as  it  
happens,  would  have  taken  a  month  to  complete.  
 
11. Despite  bad  weather,  my  son  and  I  argued  that  we  were  not  getting  what  was  promised  or  paid  
for.    Furthermore,  despite  promises  to  the  contrary,  there  were  no  available  flights  from  
Kathmandu  to  return  home  even  if  we  could  have  stayed.  
 
12. Subsequently,  I  sought  a  refund  of  my  $80,000  plus  cost  of  the  trip  or  at  least  the  $25,000  for  
the  jump  which  I  did  not  make.    U.S.  counsel  told  me  that  taking  action  against  a  British  citizen  
in  British  Courts  (I  am  British  myself)  would  be  difficult  and  furthermore,  although  Nigel  Gifford  
has  taken  in  more  than  five  hundred    thousand  pounds  sterling  and  not  paid  any  of  his  
contractors,  he  was  declaring  bankruptcy.    Where  this  money  went  was,  (and  is)  a  total  mystery,  
but  he  apparently  has  considerable  funds  available  for  this  litigation.  
 
13. I  have  observed  the  movie  Scamdive  Everest  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-­‐FmZ-­‐
MLCFdU  )  and  agree  with  every  word  and  sentiment  (with  the  caveat  that  I  was  not  present  for  
some  of  the  interviews),  but  for  Gifford  to  take  action  against  a  young  filmmaker  in  an  effort  to  
suppress  the  truth  is  scandalous.  
 
 
Statement  of  Truth.  

 
Alan  G.  Walton,  Ph.D.,  D.Sc.  
Chairman    
Oxford  Bioscience  Corp.  
Emeritus  Professor  Case  Western  Reserve  University  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 )LOHGIRUWKH'HIHQGDQW
)LUVWVWDWHPHQWRI3ULVFLOOD5HSWRQ
'DWHG-DQXDU\


,17+(+,*+&28572)-867,&( &/$,012+4'
48((1¶6%(1&+',9,6,21



 1,*(/)5$1. &ODLPDQW
*,))25'

  

 DQG 

  

 67(3+(16/$7(5 'HIHQGDQW






67$7(0(172)3ULVFLOOD5HSWRQ





  0\ QDPH LV 3ULVFLOOD 5HSWRQ  0\ PDLOLQJ DGGUHVV LV 32 %R[ 
30%%UHFNHQULGJH&RORUDGR0\UHVLGHQFHLVORFDWHGDW
6NL +LOO 5G ' %UHFNHQULGJH &2   , PDNH WKLV VWDWHPHQW RQ
EHKDOI RI WKH 'HIHQGDQW 6WHSKHQ 6ODWHU , DP SUHSDUHG WR DWWHQG &RXUW
WR JLYH HYLGHQFH LQ WKLV PDWWHU , FDQQRW DWWHQG FRXUW EHFDXVH , OLYH LQ 
%UHFNHQULGJH &RORUDGR DQG WKH FRVW RI IO\LQJ WR (QJODQG LV WRR PXFK
GLIILFXOW IRU PH +RZHYHU , ZRXOG EH KDSS\ WR WHVWLI\ YLD 6N\SH RU VRPH
RWKHUYLGHRPHDQV

,ZDVDQREVHUYHURQ7KH)LUVW(YHU6N\GLYH(YHUHVW7ULS,ZDVWROG,
ZRXOGEHDEOHWRDFFRPSDQ\P\KXVEDQGDQGZRXOGEHDEOHWRWDNHDULGH
LQRQHRIWKHDLUFUDIWDWWKH'=WRYLHZ(YHUHVWIURPDERYH$VORQJDVWKH
ZHDWKHU SHUPLWWHG 7KDW GLG QRW KDSSHQ  7KH DLUFUDIW WKDW ZDV SURPLVHG
WREHWKHUHZDVQRWSUHVHQW6RHYHQLIWKHZHDWKHUZDVJRRGWKHUHZDV
QHYHUJRLQJWREHHQRXJKWLPHWRJHWDOOWKHVN\GLYHUVDFKDQFHWRMXPS

  8SRQ DUULYLQJ LQ .DWKPDQGX WKH <DN DQG <HWL +RWHO GLG QRW KDYH RXU
QDPHVRQWKHUHJLVWHUIRUEHLQJZLWKWKHJURXS7KLVZDVP\ILUVWUHGIODJ

$VZHGHSDUWHGIRUWKHDLUSRUWLWZDVDSSDUHQWWKDWWKHOHDGHUVKLSZDV
ODFNLQJDQGWKHJURXSZDVFRPSOHWHO\XQRUJDQL]HG*HWWLQJRQWKHSODQHV
ZDVDIUHHIRUDOODQGQROHDGHUVKLSZDVDSSDUHQW:HZHUHKDQGHGSODQH
WLFNHWVDQGWROGWRJHWRQDQ\IOLJKWWR/XNOD

 7KH JURXS ZDV VHSHUDWHG LQWR WKUHH WUHNNLQJ JURXSV DQG P\ JURXS
GLG QRW KDYH D WUXH WUHN OHDGHU VR WKH\ KDG DQ LQFRPSHWHQW \RXQJ JLUO
OHDGLQJ RXU JURXS , DP QRW VXUH ZKDW KHU UROH ZDV VXSSRVH WR EH DW WKH
EHJLQQLQJ RI WKH WULS EXW VKH ZDV WKURZQ LQWR WKLV OHDGHUVKLS UROH ZKHQ
VKH KDG QR EXVLQHVV OHDGLQJ SHRSOH  , KDYH WUHNNHG PDQ\ SODFHV DQG ,
KDGDORWPRUHH[SHULHQFHLQPRXQWDLQHHULQJWKDQWKLVJLUOKDG6R,ZDV
QDWXUDOO\FRQFHUQHGDERXWWKHUHVWRIWKHWULSDKHDG,WZDVREYLRXV1LJHO
KDGRYHUVROGWKHWULSDQGXQGHUSODQQHG

  ,W ZDV REYLRXV WKDW 1LJHO KDG VHSHUDWHG WKH JURXSV E\ ILQDQFLDO
PHDQV +H ZDV JLYLQJ WKH ULFKHVW SHRSOH WKH EHVW DFFRPRGDWLRQV DQG
PHDO RSWLRQV , ZDV WROG , FRXOG QRW JR HDW DW WKH (YHUHVW 9LHZ +RWHO
EHFDXVH,ZDVQRWVWD\LQJWKHUH$OWKRXJK,KDGSDLGWKHVDPHDPRXQWRI
PRQH\DVHYHU\RQHHOVH7KHUHZHUHSHRSOHIURPWKHVHFRQGJURXSWKDW
ZHUH DOORZHG WR VWD\ WKHUH EHIRUH , ZDV ZKHQ , VKRXOG KDYH EHHQ LQ WKDW
KRWHO , PD\ QRW EH D %LOOLRQDLUH EXW , DP VXUH , DP DFFXVWRP WR VWD\LQJ
LQ QLFHU DFFRPPRGDWLRQV WKDQ WKDW RI WKH 3DQRUDPD KRWHO  7KH IRRG DW
WKH 3DQRUDPD +RWHO ZDV WHUULEOH ,W ZDV REYLRXV WKH\ ZHUH UXQQLQJ ORZ
 EHFDXVHZHKDGWRHDWEURWKPDQ\QLJKWVLQDURZDQGWKHPDLQFRXUVHV
EHFDPHXQLGHQWLILDEOH7KHVKRZHUZDVIDOOLQJDSDUWDQGPDGHLWGLIILFXOW
WRKDYHSURSHUK\JLHQH$VDSD\LQJJXHVW,KDGWRHDWXSVWDLUVLQDORIW
OLNHVHWWLQJRQPHWDOSODWHVZKLOHWKHHPSOR\HHVRI1LJHO*LIIRUGZRXOGHDW
LQDSURSHUGLQLQJURRPRQSRUFHOHLQSODWHVDQGEHWWHUIRRG,WZDVFOHDUWR
PHWKDW1LJHOGLGQRWFDUHDERXWDQ\RQHRQFHKHJRWKLVPRQH\IURPDOORI
XV

 2QH RI WKH SD\LQJ FXVWRPHUV QDPHG 5DOSK KDG RQO\  MXPSV RU
VRPHWKLQJOLNHWKDW1LJHOWROGKLPKHZRXOGEHDEOHWRGRDVN\GLYHRQKLV
RZQ(YHQWKRXJKWKHEURFKXUHVDLG\RXPXVWKDYHMXPSV5DOSKSDLG
IRUKLVMXPSDQGWKHQZDVWROGRQFHKHJRWWKHUHKHZRXOGQRWEHDEOHWR
MXPSDIWHUDOO,IKHZDQWHGWRKHKDGWRWDQGHPDQGSD\WKHDGGLWLRQDOIHHV
DV ZHOO 5DOSK HQGHG XS ZDONLQJ EDFN WR /XNOD RQ KLV RZQ DQG UHWXUQLQJ
WR/RQGRQ,KDYHQHYHUKHDUGIURPKLPDJDLQ,KRSHKHPDGHLWEDFNRN
<RXZLOOKDYHWRVSHDNWR5DOSKIRUKLVVLGHRIWKDWVWRU\

$VIDUDV,DPFRQFHUQHGHYHU\WKLQJ,VDLGLQWKH6WHSKHQ6ODWHUYLGHRLV
FRPSOHWHO\WUXHDQGDFFXUDWH6WHSKHQZDVDVNLQJPHTXHVWLRQVDQG,ZDV
DQVZHULQJWKHPDV,H[SHULHQFHGLWWKURXJKRXWWKHHQWLUHH[SHGLWLRQ




6WDWHPHQWRIWUXWK

,EHOLHYHWKHFRQWHQWVRIWKLVVWDWHPHQWWREHWUXH




6LJQHGBB3ULVFLOOD5HSWRQBBBBBBBBB'DWHBBB-DQXDU\BBBBBBBB




 Filed for the Defendant
First statement of Andrew Montriou
Dated 30 Dec 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO

QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION 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