Plea to judge over Da Vinci Code author's evidence

Dan Brown’s evidence denying he had copied parts of his blockbuster novel, The Da Vinci Code, should be viewed with “deep suspicion”, a High Court judge was told today.

The American author gave evidence in the witness box at the London court for publisher Random House.

Jonathan Rayner James QC told Mr Justice Peter Jones that Brown had claimed he had not read the book written by his clients, The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail, until a late stage in the production of The Da Vinci Code.

“His evidence should be approached with deep suspicion.

“He had almost no recollection of matters that related to issues of timing.

“He would struggle to recall a year, was rarely able to recall a month. His general attitude in cross-examination was unco-operative.”

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh claim Brown copied the central theme of their own 1982 best-seller – that Jesus married Mary Magdalene, they had children who eventually married into a line of French kings and the descendants survive until the present day – to use in The Da Vinci Code.

Mr James said Brown had admitted that much of the research for the novel was carried out by his wife, Blythe.

“The evidence of Blythe Brown was of fundamental importance to this case.

“It was crucial in revealing the dependency on The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail and the extent to which she relied upon it. Perhaps that explains why she was not produced.”

Summing up to the judge as the trial comes to a close, Mr James said Brown had said he did not want his wife involved because she not like the glare of publicity.

“This is unsatisfactory. He has always known her role in the creation of The Da Vinci Code.”

Mr James said many of the markings in Brown’s copy of The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail were made by his wife and, if she had been produced as a witness, she could have explained why.

He said it was also of crucial importance to the case when The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail began being used for research for The Da Vinci Code.

“It is, of course, up to Blythe Brown to decide whether she gives evidence.

“However, the decision that she should not do so appears to have been Dan Brown’s decision.

“It remains the position that only she knows the extent of her involvement in the research and creation of The Da Vinci Code.”

He said she could have given evidence via video link to limit publicity or she could have produced a witness statement.

“No attempt was made to produce any evidence from Blythe Brown at all.”

He asked the judge: “Why are my clients here? Why do two individuals put themselves through this ordeal against the resources of a multi-national publishing company after a long period of mutual co-operation?” (The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail was also published by Random House).

The reason was because after reading The Da Vinci Code, they believed Brown had “copied from their work”, said Mr James.