da bet7： A timeline of events in the episode involving Chris Cairns, Brendon McCullum and several alleged wrongdoings
da wazamba： ESPNcricinfo staff08-Jun-20162010January: Cairns declares intent to sue Lalit Modi over accusatory tweet
The then IPL commissioner Lalit Modi tweets that the IPL decided to withdraw Cairns’ name from the auction list because of his alleged involvement in fixing. In his response, a statement issued by his solicitor Andrew Fitch-Holland, Cairns says: “The allegation made by Lalit Modi that I have been involved in match-fixing is scandalous and wholly untrue. For him to circulate such a falsehood around the world is outrageous. Mr Modi’s allegation has caused me huge personal distress and professional damage. I cannot allow these slurs to ruin my future and I have instructed my solicitors, Collyer Bristow LLP, to bring proceedings for defamation against Mr Modi.”2011February: McCullum reports alleged approaches by Cairns
Brendon McCullum tells John Rhodes, a representative of the ICC’s anti-corruption unit, about the allegedly corrupt approaches Chris Cairns made to him in 2008. New Zealand’s then captain Daniel Vettori is present at the Rhodes’ meeting, for moral support according to McCullum. McCullum decides to speak out only after Rhodes addressed the team ahead of their World Cup 2011 opener, telling them “if we had been or were approached about match-fixing and we did not report it, then we were, in the eyes of the ICC, just as guilty as the person who approached us”. McCullum did not report the alleged approaches by his one-time hero earlier because “it’s not easy ‘ratting’ on someone I regarded as a mate”.2012March: Cairns wins libel case against Modi
Chris Cairns wins his libel case in London against Lalit Modi and is awarded damages of £90,000 ($142,000). Judge David Bean of the High Court finds that Modi had “singularly failed to provide any reliable evidence” that Cairns was involved in fixing of any kind.2014May: McCullum report on Cairns leaked
The carries parts of the statements made by Brendon McCullum on Chris Cairns to the ICC’s anti-corruption investigators. According to the newspaper, McCullum told investigators that he was first approached during IPL 2008, and he turned down offers of up to $180,000 to underperform. New Zealand Cricket releases a statement confirming that McCullum is not under investigation himself, and says: “New Zealand Cricket is dismayed that Brendon McCullum’s testimony to the International Cricket Council has been leaked to the media.”July: Vincent confesses to being a ‘cheat’
“My name is Lou Vincent and I am a cheat. I have abused my position as a professional sportsman on a number of occasions by choosing to accept money in fixing.” Thus begins a tell-all confession from the former New Zealand batsman, who, hours after releasing this statement, is banned for life by the ECB; Vincent had confessed to 11 offences punishable by a life ban under ECB anti-corruption regulations. He is banned from “all forms of cricket” and prevented from “playing, coaching or participating in any form of cricket which is recognised or sanctioned by ECB, the ICC or any other National Cricket Federation”.2015October 5: Perjury case opens against Cairns
A case opens at Southwark Crown Court against Chris Cairns, who is accused by the Crown Prosecution Service of lying under oath during the 2012 libel case involving Lalit Modi. Also standing trial is Cairns’ former legal counsel Andrew Fitch-Holland, who is accused of perverting the course of justice in the 2012 case.October 12: Vincent testifies against Cairns
Lou Vincent is the first of the witnesses to be called for the prosecution. He claims he was acting under “direct orders” from Cairns when he agreed to fix matches in the now-defunct Indian Cricket League in 2008.October 15: McCullum testifies against Cairns
McCullum gives evidence in the perjury case. He claims he was asked three times by Cairns to get involved in spot-fixing. He admits he did not report the approach until three years later because “he didn’t want it to be true”.October 21: ACSU official questioned on McCullum’s statements
John Rhodes, the Australasian head of the ICC’s anti-corruption and security unit (ACSU), takes the stand in the perjury case; it was to this official that Brendon McCullum had made his initial statement on Cairns in 2011. Rhodes says McCullum’s initial statement omitted any explicit mention of “match-fixing”, but the “inference was clear”. However, he says, his job as a field officer was simply to collect information and it was up to his superiors to investigate his findings. He admits to having lost the diary where he had made notes on McCullum’s report.November: Cairns found not guilty of perjury
The nine-week perjury trial ends. Justice Sweeney, the presiding judge, says the evidence of two of the three “key” witnesses – Lou Vincent, his ex-wife Eleanor Riley and Brendon McCullum – would have to be accepted as true for the perjury charge to be upheld. The jury delivers a not-guilty verdict after 10 hours and 17 minutes of deliberation.2016June: McCullum hits out at ACSU’s handling of his report on Cairns
During his MCC Spirit of Cricket lecture, Brendon McCullum condemns the casual manner in which his first interview with John Rhodes was conducted. He says of Rhodes: “[He] took notes – he did not record our conversation. He said he would get what I said down on paper and that it would probably end up at the bottom of the file with nothing eventuating. Looking back on this, I am very surprised by what I perceive to be a very casual approach to gathering evidence. I was reporting two approaches by a former international star of the game. I was not asked to elaborate on anything I said and I signed a statement that was essentially nothing more than a skeleton outline.” He also condemns the severity of the punishment dished out to Lou Vincent, pointing out that Vincent had spoken out on fixing and co-operated with the authorities on the matter. In its response to McCullum’s statements, the ICC denies the origin of the leaked statement came from within the governing body and stresses that it has “put strong measures” in place to prevent the recurrence of such an incident.
