A Belfast judge hopes to give his ruling this morning on an application to acquit a former soldier, Mr Keith Winward, of robbing his employer, Securicor, of £1.1 million.
Appealing for the acquittal yesterday, Mr Eugene Grant QC said his client was innocent of the £1.1 million robbery of the van, and had been acting under fear and duress.
Mr Winward (36), a former Green Howard soldier from Middlesborough, is on trial at Belfast Crown Court accused of Northern Ireland's biggest-ever armed hold-up, in April last year, and of kidnapping another security guard.
Mr Grant said even police accepted that Mr Winward was involved with "evil and ruthless men".
Mr Winward had said he had been acting under duress after three armed Provisional IRA men took his wife and family hostage in his Finch Way home in the loyalist Taughmonagh estate in south Belfast.
Mr Grant said that the Crown case, which he described as being full of weakness and inconsistencies, was that Mr Winward was a robber himself, but that just did not stand up to scrutiny.
The case carried "the clear badge of innocence." Every item the prosecution had raised had been shown to be consistent with that case of innocence.
His actions before, during and after the robbery were those of a man impelled to act out of fear, "as any sober person in his position".
Mr Grant asked why, if Mr Winward had helped plan the robbery, did he stop at stealing just £1 million as he was in a position to hand over up to £1O million from other cash delivery runs he made.
"This is not the stigma or mark of a conspirator," Mr Grant added.
However, Mr John Creaney QC, prosecuting, claimed Mr Winward had a case to answer "which cries out for some explanation or comment if he is an innocent man."
Mr Winward, he said, had made a witness statement to police, but later refused to answer their questions during interview. That statement was far from being reliable and "leaves much to be desired and a lot of questions unanswered."
It was not a simple case of running a defence of duress because the court had not heard Mr Winward from the witness box about "the nature, source or context of the duress".
Mr Creaney said the case against Mr Winward was not one of inconsistent evidence or confusion, but a clear case against him and the charges he faced.