Charles Ingram

Charles Ingram
Charles Ingram with his wife Diana
Born	(1963-08-06) August 6, 1963
Occupation(s)	Author, Novelist
Known for	Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?

Charles Ingram (born 6 August 1963) is a former British Army major and novelist who made headlines in the United Kingdom after cheating in the television show Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? in 2001. Despite being convicted of deception, Ingram maintains that he did not cheat.

He is married to Diana Ingram and has since participated in other television game/reality shows, including The Weakest Link and Hell's Kitchen.

In 2003 he received a conditional discharge for insurance fraud after being found guilty of one count of deception and a related count regarding a claim against a house contents insurance policy. In 2007 he was convicted of assaulting a 13-year-old youth who coughed in his face while he was out jogging - he received an absolute discharge.

Education and career

Charles Ingram went to Oswestry School and obtained a BSc in Civil Engineering from Kingston Polytechnic, an MSc in Corporate Management from Cranfield University, Chartered membership of the Institute of Personnel and Development, membership of the Chartered Management Institute, membership of the Association for Project Management, membership of the Society of Authors, and membership of Mensa. In 1986, he trained for the Army at Sandhurst and was commissioned as an officer in the Royal Engineers. He was promoted to the rank of Major in 1995, and in 1999 he served in Bosnia for six months on NATO peacekeeping duties. He was forced to resign from the Army in 2003 and became a novelist.

The Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? affair

The ITV programme was produced by Celador at Elstree Studios, Borehamwood, Hertfordshire. The show, hosted by Chris Tarrant, was recorded on 9 September 2001 and 10 September 2001. Ingram won the £1,000,000 prize but the payout was suspended when he was accused of cheating by having an accomplice cough when he read out the correct answers. Following a trial at Southwark Crown Court lasting seven weeks including jury deliberation for three-and-a-half days, which ended soon after a jury member was evicted for discussing the case in public, Charles Ingram, his wife Diana Ingram and Tecwen Whittock were convicted by a majority verdict of "procuring the execution of a valuable security by deception" on 7 April 2003. In fact before this, Diana was a contestant and won 32,000 pounds and then her brother won 32,000 pounds.

On the day of the verdict, the Ingrams were each given 18-month prison sentences suspended for two years, each fined £15,000, and each ordered to pay £10,000 towards prosecution costs. Within two months of the verdict and sentence, the trial judge ordered the Ingrams to pay additional defence costs orders, Charles £40,000 and Diana £25,000.

The Army Board invited Major Ingram to resign his commission. He retired on 19 August 2003 with his state-earned pension of 17 years.

On 19 May 2004 the Court of Appeal denied Ingram leave to appeal against his conviction and upheld his sentence but agreed to quash his wife's fine and prosecution costs. On 5 October 2004 the House of Lords denied Ingram his leave to appeal against his fine and prosecution costs, and he appealed to the European Court of Human Rights. On 20 October 2004 the original trial judge reduced Ingram's defence costs order to £25,000 and Diana Ingram's defence costs order to £5,000. On 21 May 2005 Ingram appealed against his conviction to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The CCRC completed its review in Autumn 2006 concluding that 'there was insufficient prospect of overturning the conviction'.

An essay [2] written by James Plaskett in favour of the innocence of Charles Ingram, his wife, and Whittock led to the journalist Bob Woffinden, who had a long time interest in miscarriages of justice, publishing a two-page article in the 9 October 2004 edition of the British newspaper the Daily Mail, entitled 'Is The Coughing Major Innocent?'

Plaskett's essay also prompted a reconsideration of the case in The Guardian Comment Is Free blog on 17 July 2006 from an initially sceptical Jon Ronson.[3]

File:DeepSiegeCoverFront.jpg

Cover of Charles Ingram's novel Deep Siege (Pegasus, 2007)

Charles and Diana Ingram declared bankruptcy in October 2004. Charles Ingram is now a novelist and has written two novels, The Network, published on 27 April 2006 and, Deep Siege, published on 8 October 2007. His third book set to be published in early 2009, Major Injustice, is a memoir of his Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? experience.

Evidence

The tapes

A transcript of the video tape played in court can be found at [4]. In court Ingram claimed the video tape was 'unrepresentative of what I heard'; indeed, he continues to assert that it was 'unfairly manipulated'. He claims that he neither listened for, encouraged, nor noticed any coughing. The prosecution alleged that, of the 192 coughs recorded during his second-night performance, 32 were recorded from the ten Fastest Finger First contestants, and that 19 of the 32 coughs clearly heard on the video tape recorded louder than both Ingram's and Tarrant's voices, were 'significant'. Tarrant also denied hearing any coughing, claiming he was too busy to notice.

Graham Whitehurst

Whitehurst, another contestant who has appeared on the show as a Fastest Finger First contestant on four occasions, contacted Celador a week after the show, to share with them his concerns about Ingram's peculiar performance. Celador told him they were already investigating concerns about cheating, and that they were considering the possibility of coughing as a source of assistance. Whitehurst told Celador he saw Whittock coughing. Celador's MD, Paul Smith, advised Whitehurst to contact the police if he had concerns. Instead, Whitehurst contacted The Sun newspaper. Three days later, after The Sun had printed the exclusive about the allegation, Whitehurst, who had by now approached the police as 'Horace' via email, spoke to them for the first time. Graham [aka Larry] Whitehurst told police during interview that he saw another contestant, Whittock, cough once during the last question and that he thought it might have helped Ingram.

Over the next eighteen months, it transpired that Whitehurst had met face-to-face with Celador on at least four separate occasions between September 2001 and the trial in March 2003, including on one occasion with their solicitors. In court, Whitehurst was adamant that he had known the answers to Ingram's questions, and that he had been able to anticipate coughing from an early stage on the night, and that he was entirely convinced coughing had helped Ingram. Whitehurst did not immediately mention the cheating that evening in the studio, bar, or elsewhere, for he described himself in court as 'extremely angry'. Also, when 'watching Mr Whittock intently from early on', as he described his focus during the recording on Whittock in court, he did not notice Whittock say 'No' on 'Berlin' or see him cough more than once during the £1M question when five of nineteen 'significant coughs' were alleged by the prosecutor to have been made by Whittock.

Tecwen Whittock

Whittock claims to have suffered from a persistent cough for his entire life and insisted that he had a genuine cough caused by a combination of hay fever and a dust allergy and that it was only "coincidence" that his throat problem coincided with the right answer. However, during the trial the jury heard evidence that once Whittock himself was picked to sit in the hot seat, his throat problems disappeared. Whittock later testified that he drank several bottles of water before he went in front of the cameras. Whittock also insisted that he had not known the answers to three of the questions he allegedly helped with. However, the police found the answer to question number 12 regarding the artist who painted, The Ambassadors in a hand-written general knowledge book at his home, along with the answer to question number 10 regarding the album, Born to Do It.

Davis, the floor manager, said that as soon as the coughing came to his notice during the recording he decided to find out who was responsible. 'The loudest coughing was coming from Tecwen in seat number three', he claimed. 'He was talking to the person to his left when I was observing him, and then he turned towards the set and the hot seat to cough.' Whittock said in court that 'you do not cough into someone's face' [5]. Despite searching for any form of assistance during the recording Davis did not notice the word 'no' or deduce that coughing was assisting Ingram.

During the trial, Whittock portrayed himself as a, 'serial quiz show loser' However, Whittock twice won the Wales heat of Brain of Britain (on BBC Radio 4) and in one semi-final was only narrowly beaten into runner-up spot by quiz legend Daphne Fowler.

After the show

A researcher (the Ingrams' chaperone), Ms Winstanley, told the court that Ingram's initial excitement at winning the £1 million top prize rapidly disappeared after returning to his dressing room. In the ten minutes it took to get a glass of wine for his wife and a pint of bitter and a cigar for himself, she claimed the atmosphere in the couple's dressing room had changed. She first heard a window being slammed shut and then raised voices from inside. "They were raised in argument," she explained. "I saw Mrs Ingram was pale, shaking. I then asked Mr Ingram if he would like me to light his cigar but he told me to leave." Winstanley told how she tried to lighten the atmosphere in his dressing room. "He raised his arms up in the air and said 'Don't start, I have got things to do. You don't understand'," she claimed. "It was then that he told me to 'Fuck off.' Mr Ingram then moved towards me, which indicated to me that he wanted me to leave the room. So I did," she claimed.

Celador employees including Mr Tarrant spoke of their shock when told what Ingram said to Winstanley. The court heard from other Celador employees about how Ingram appeared very tense and unhappy minutes after winning the top prize. This was at odds with testimony from other witnesses at the recording.

Mr and Mrs Ingram denied Miss Winstanley's recollection of events and telling her to "Fuck off." Mr Ingram said he could not remember opening or closing a window, and thought it more likely he opened one to smoke a cigar, but said that Winstanley may have overheard both him and his wife talking excitedly on two mobile telephones simultaneously, calls that were proved to have been made. He said that he was concerned about attending work the following morning, something he had to do, and remembered debating with his wife about overnighting in a local five-star hotel that had been offered - something she was keen to do but he was not, not until he remembered he was working up in London the following day. Ingram claimed it was Winstanley who said that she must leave, as the show was still recording, and she apologised for leaving them alone after his big win but she had other responsibilities to attend to.

Mr Tarrant, who drank champagne with the Ingrams in their dressing room, said he was convinced the major was genuine when he signed the £1 million cheque. "If I thought there was anything wrong, I certainly would not have signed it." When asked whether the atmosphere in the dressing room was tense after the show, Tarrant replied: "No, not at all. They seemed as normal as people who have just won a million pounds would be in the situation." However, he said that on his way to the dressing room, "I had been told there had been quite an unpleasant exchange." Researcher Eve Winstanley testified in court that Mr. Ingram seemed very "unhappy" for someone who had just won over a million pounds.

Celador employees produced and reviewed various compilation tapes, before and after contacting the police. Celador and their editing company, Editworks, retained all the tapes during the case and reproduced all tapes for court.

In court, Smith confirmed that his company had previously produced a television programme involving witnesses about the case, for broadcast on ITV after the trial. This was subsequently broadcast on ITV a month after the trial as 'Tonight With Trevor MacDonald - Major Fraud', which was credited with over 17 million viewers. Two weeks later, the same channel broadcast another programme entitled 'The Final Answer', which was credited with over 5 million viewers.

Verdict

The trial judge summed up the case by stating to the jury that the tapes and Mr Whitehurst were the two pieces of 'direct evidence' offered by the prosecution before adding that, 'coincidences happen'.

The foreman at first told the judge that they thought Charles and Tecwen to be guilty but Diana not. He was informed that since all three were co-defendants, this was not an acceptable conclusion. He then returned to the jury room and emerged some twenty minutes later saying that they now thought her guilty as well.

Immediately after the jury's verdict the judge sentenced the three defendants, describing the act as a 'schoolboy prank'.

Other details

Ingram said his discursive and apparently indecisive manner when answering questions was due to nervousness and for effect. 'There was a degree of wishing to be good on television and be a bit dramatic. What I said, thinking out loud, and what I actually meant were not the same thing. It was a very stressful period.'

The producer and decision-maker on the night, David Briggs, maintained a low profile throughout the case and did not testify in court. Almost all Celador employees present on the night, who made up most of the prosecution witnesses, said they became suspicious early on during the second night as Ingram's performance on the first night had confirmed their pre-show beliefs that he was unintelligent and would not last long. In court, Tarrant described him as 'Tim nice but dim'. To counter the allegations, Ingram took an invigilated IQ test shortly before the trial, and was found to have an IQ that lies within the top two per cent of the population (it allowed him to join Mensa). Ingram, who is highly qualified, has repeatedly suggested that success on the show is more about knowledge than intelligence.

It was suggested in the media that Ingram took a considerable amount of time on the second night - on one question 'half an hour' - to answer each of the questions. Such was the rumour-mill, The Sun reported he had been in the hot seat for three hours on the second night. The Special Enquiry Team of New Scotland Yard were reportedly keen to learn whether this may have been a delaying tactic to allow someone outside the studio to look up the questions on a computer or the internet, before sending a text message to a mobile phone held by an audience member. The audience member would then cough corresponding to one of the four options.

In fact, and including any delay caused by the host who does much of the talking and controls the quiz, the time between the questions given (flashed-up on screen) and answers accepted (green light highlighting correct answer) on the night alleged cheating took place were as follows:

• Q8. 1 minute 1 second.
• Q9. 48 seconds.
• Q10. 4 minutes 11 seconds (Used 50:50 lifeline).
• Q11. 2 minutes 6 seconds.
• Q12. 1 minute 47 seconds.
• Q13. 1 minute 4 seconds.
• Q14. 4 minutes 6 seconds.
• Q15. 5 minutes 21 seconds.

A subjective analysis of the uncut recording broadcast on ITV2 shows that of the above time, Ingram was responsible for considerably less than ten minutes. On the first night Ingram played, an earlier contestant took 24 minutes on one answer.[6]

Celador used several security measures to prevent someone from cheating during the show. There is one camera trained on the contestant's face to make sure they are not looking for signals from the audience. Another camera focuses on friends and relatives in the audience to see if they make any signals towards the contestant. Additionally, players were always positioned with their backs to any supporters in the audience. Indeed, during his deliberations on the last question Ingram mentioned turning around to the host and was told "Charles: don´t turn round!"

The questions he faced

[7]

Question 1 (£100): On which of these would you air laundry?

• A - Clothes Dog
• B - Clothes Horse
• C - Clothes Rabbit
• D - Clothes Pig

Answer: B

Question 2 (£200): What is the name given to a person against increasing the power of the European Union?

• A - Eurosceptic
• B - Eurostar
• C - Eurotrash
• D - Eurovision

Answer: A

Question 3 (£300): Butterscotch is a type of what?

• A - Shortbread
• B - Pavement game
• C - Garden Flower
• D - A brittle toffee

Answer: D

Question 4 (£500): What is the nickname of a famous Scottish Army Regiment?

• A - Black Cat
• B - Black Widow
• C - Black Sea
• D - Black Watch

Answer: D

Question 5 (£1,000): The Normans who invaded and conquered England in 1066 spoke which language?

• A - German
• B - Norwegian
• C - French
• D - Danish

Answer: C

Question 6 (£2,000): In Coronation Street, who is Audrey's daughter?

• A - Janice
• B - Gail
• C - Linda
• D - Sally

Answer: B (Ingram "asked the audience" which voted 89% for Gail)

Question 7 (£4,000): The River Foyle is found in which part of the UK?

• A - England
• B - Scotland
• C -Northern Ireland
• D - Wales

Answer: C (Ingram "phoned a friend" who suggested Northern Ireland).

Question 8 (£8,000): Who was the second husband of Jacqueline Kennedy?

• A - Adnan Khashoggi
• B - Ronald Reagan
• C - Aristotle Onassis
• D - Rupert Murdoch

Answer: C

Question 9 (£16,000): Emmental is a cheese from which country?

• A - France
• B - Italy
• C - Netherlands
• D - Switzerland

Answer: D

Question 10 (£32,000): Who had the hit UK album called Born To Do It, in 2000?

• A - Coldplay
• B - Toploader
• C - A1
• D - Craig David

Answer: D (Ingram used his 50-50 option, which left him with A1 or Craig David).

Question 11 (£64,000): Gentleman v Players is an annual match between amateurs and professionals in which sport?

• A - Lawn Tennis
• B - Rugby Union
• C - Polo
• D - Cricket

Answer: D

Question 12 (£125,000): The Ambassadors in the National Gallery is a painting by which artist?

• A - Van Eyck
• B - Holbein
• C - Michelangelo
• D - Rembrandt

Answer: B

Question 13 (£250,000): What type of garment is an Anthony Eden?

• A - Overcoat
• B - Hat
• C - Shoe
• D - Tie

Answer: B

Question 14 (£500,000): Baron Haussmann is best known for his planning for which city?

• A - Rome
• B - Paris
• C - Berlin
• D - Athens

Answer: B

Question 15 (£1,000,000): A number 1 followed by 100 zeros is known by what name?

• A - Googol
• B - Megatron
• C - Gigabit
• D - Nanomol

Answer: A

Fastest Finger First task

Agatha Christie novel title: "Death," "On," "The," "Nile."

Aftermath and Other Similar Game Show Incidents

While it was not directly related to the Ingram scandal, the US version of Millionaire adopted in the 2008-09 season a new rule that puts a clock (Q1-Q5: 15 seconds, Q6-Q10: 30 seconds, Q11-Q15: 45 seconds, Q15 also includes time accumulated from Q1-Q14) to prevent such long delays that allowed for such questionable behaviour that took place in the Ingram incident.

An incident during a 22 September 2008 taping of The Price Is Right in the United States had network officials and presenter Drew Carey suspicious a member of the audience had given a contestant a bid in the Showcase that was perfect. Officials had a 45-minute stoppage of taping and then the presenter himself, an owner of the Seattle Sounders FC, was suspicious of match-fixing by the audience member by his reveal of the historic moment. (Carey could have faced further charges from fellow Major League Soccer owners if he was found guilty of match-fixing on his game show; he is also a credentialed FIFA photographer.)

The 2008 movie Slumdog Millionaire, about a contestant who goes on Kaun Banega Crorepati, the Indian version of the show, and is suspected of cheating, is an adaptation of the novel Q and A by Indian novelist Vikas Swarup. Though the novel did not focus on any particular show, the film used Millionaire partly because of Ingram's experience. Swarup said, "If a British army major can be accused of cheating, then an ignorant tiffin boy from the world's biggest slum can definitely be accused of cheating."

External links

• The Official Website of Charles Ingram
• [8]
• Essay at Justjustice.org