Wife of Charles Hanson ‘not controlled in any sense of the word’ – defence KC

The wife of TV auctioneer Charles Hanson was unstable, unhappy and “had an agenda” against her husband as their marriage “imploded” into divorce proceedings, his barrister has told a jury.

In her closing speech to jurors at Derby Crown Court, defence KC Sasha Wass submitted that Rebecca Hanson “was not controlled in any sense of the word” during her marriage to the Bargain Hunt presenter.

The Crown has claimed that WhatsApp messages sent by the celebrity to his wife amount to a “set of confessions” to the charges against him.

The 46-year-old, who told jurors his wife was allowed “to do what she wanted” and falsely accused him of having athlete’s foot, denies charges of controlling or coercive behaviour over a 10-year period, assault occasioning actual bodily harm and assault by beating.

Addressing the jury on Thursday, Ms Wass urged jurors to keep in mind that the case against Hanson rested wholly on the evidence of one witness, and that Mrs Hanson had decided to start divorce proceedings.

Highlighting an incident in January 2023 in which Mr Hanson moved antique furniture into their then home, Ms Wass submitted that Mrs Hanson had launched a “tirade of abuse” aimed at her husband which amounted to “shrewish and very unpleasant behaviour”.

During the tirade, the court heard, messaging and video evidence showed Mrs Hanson called her husband a “dickhead” and a “selfish idiot” and told him: “You have no f****** idea how to look after women, do you?”

Mrs Hanson, the court heard, also told her husband: “Don’t bother with a curry – I won’t f****** eat it.”

Ms Wass told the jury panel, who have been given examples by the judge of types of behaviour that can constitute coercive control: “The observations I make are these: it (coercive behaviour) doesn’t include presenting your spouse with surprise antique furniture that they don’t happen to like, and it doesn’t include being late home.

“The furniture episode will leave you in no doubt who was the dominant partner in the Hanson home. The suggestion that Charles was coercive and controlling is preposterous.”

Ms Wass also questioned the “integrity and authenticity” of photographic evidence provided by Mrs Hanson, adding: “All the evidence in this case comes from her, including the evidence of her mother and her friend because those two witnesses simply repeat what she had told them.

“Rebecca Hanson made these allegations to the police in June 2023 at the very same time that she decided to bring divorce proceedings.

“Inevitably she would have had an agenda. Anybody involved in a separation, particularly a nasty separation is going to have an agenda.”

Claiming Mrs Hanson had been vindictive, Ms Wass added: “What the evidence in this case shows is that Rebecca Hanson is unstable and unhappy and does believe that life has short-changed her.

“Mrs Hanson had what most of us would consider is a dream life. She had a magnificent home together with somebody employed to clean that home.

“She had an enormous garden and two gardeners employed to take care of the garden.

“Even the dog had someone employed to walk it.

“All of this material luxury had to be paid for. Charles had to work very hard to keep up the standard of living that had been created for Rebecca.

“He ran auction houses, travelled all over the country to make valuations. That involved him being away from the family home.”

Ms Wass asserted: “Instead of recognising his dedication, Rebecca felt remorseful and hard done by.”

Mrs Hanson wanted the jury to believe that Hanson was an “ogre” who would use brute force against her.

“If there was any truth to that why on earth would she want him to be home in good time,” Ms Wass asked. “If he was that character surely she would want him to be away as much as possible?”

Even when the marriage “imploded” Mrs Hanson was still making references to Hanson being late home, Ms Wass said, adding: “Rebecca Hanson’s real complaint was not that her husband was violent and controlling – it’s that she didn’t have the attention from her husband that she felt she deserved.

“She was not controlled in any sense of the word.

“She was being taken for granted. That is not coercive control and it is not violence.”

Addressing the Crown’s claim that WhatsApp messages sent by Hanson were a “set of confessions”, Ms Wass said: “If you look at those texts in context he is doing no such thing.”

Ms Wass said an exchange in which Mrs Hanson referred to being “chucked around” and Hanson said “I won’t ever again” was a clear example of him apologising for something he had not done.

“There have been 13 allegations made by Rebecca Hanson in this case,” Ms Wass told the court. “Not one of them could possibly in your wildest dreams be described as Rebecca being ‘chucked around’.”

Earlier, prosecutor Stephen Kemp alleged that the account given to the court by Hanson, of Ashbourne Road in Mackworth, Derby, “stretched credulity beyond any reasonable limit”.

Ms Wass will continue her closing speech on Thursday, before the judge in the trial completes his summing up by reviewing the evidence in the case.